butitisextremelydiluted，andquitesubordinatedtothenewerviewoftheterritorialconstitutionofnations。Theblendedideasarereflectedinsuchanexpressionas’Fatherland，’whichisitselfanindextothefactthatourthoughtscannotseparatenationalkinshipfromcommoncountry。NodoubtitistruethatinourdaytheolderconceptionofnationalunionthroughconsanguinityhasseemedtoberevivedbytheorieswhicharesometimescalledgenerallytheoriesofNationality，andofwhichparticularformsareknowntousasPan-SclavismandPan-Teutonism。Suchtheoriesareintruthaproductofmodernphilology，andhavegrownoutoftheassumptionthatlinguisticaffinitiesprovecommunityofblood。ButwhereverthepoliticaltheoryofNationalityisdistinctlyconceived，itamountstoaclaimthatmenofthesameraceshallbeincluded，notinthesametribal，butinthesameterritorialsovereignty。
Wecanperceive，fromtherecordsoftheHellenicandLatincity-communities，thatthere，andprobablyoveragreatpartoftheworld，thesubstitutionofcommonterritoryforcommonraceasthebasisofnationalunionwasslow，andnotaccomplishedwithoutveryviolentstruggles。’Thehistoryofpoliticalideasbegins，’Ihavesaidelsewhere，’withtheassumptionthatkinshipinbloodisthesolepossiblegroundofcommunityinpoliticalfunctions；noristhereanyofthosesubversionsoffeelingwhichweemphaticallytermrevolutionssostartlingandsocompleteasthechangewhichisaccomplishedwhensomeotherprinciple——
suchasthat，forinstance，oflocalcontiguity——establishesitselfforthefirsttimeasthebasisofcommonpoliticalaction。’Theoneobjectofancientdemocracieswas，infact，tobecountedofkintothearistocracies，simplyonthegroundthatthearistocracyofoldcitizens，andthedemocracyofnew，livedwithinthesameterritorialcircumscription。ThegoalwasreachedintimebothbytheAthenianDemosandbytheRomanPlebs；butthecompletevictoryoftheRomanpopularpartywasthesourceofinfluenceswhichhavenotspentthemselvesatthepresentmoment，sinceitisoneofthecauseswhythepassagefromtheTribaltotheTerritorialconceptionofSovereigntywasmuchmoreeasyandimperceptibleinthemodernthanintheolderworld。Ihavebeforestatedthatacertainconfusion，oratanyrateindistinctnessofdiscrimination，betweenconsanguinityandcommonsubjectiontopoweristraceableamongtherudimentsofAryanthought，andnodoubtthemixtureofnotionshashelpedtobringaboutthatidentificationofcommonnationalitywithcommonallegiancetotheKing，whichhasgreatlyfacilitatedtheabsorptionofnewbodiesofcitizensbymoderncommonwealths。ButthemajestywithwhichthememoryoftheRomanEmpiresurroundedallkingshasalsogreatlycontributedtoit，andwithoutthevictoryoftheRomanPlebeianstherewouldneverhavebeen，I
needhardlysay，anyRomanEmpire。
Thenewknowledgewhichhasbeenrapidlyaccumulatingoflateyearsenablesustotrackpreciselythesametransmutationofideasamidthesmallergroupsofkinsmensettledonlandandforming，notCommonwealths，butVillage-Communities。Thehistorianofformerdayslabouredprobablyundernogreaterdisadvantagethanthatcausedbyhisunavoidableignoranceoftheimportanceofthesecommunities，andbythenecessitythusimposeduponhimofconfininghisattentiontothelargerassemblagesoftribesmen。Ithasoften，indeed，beennoticedthataFeudalMonarchywasanexactcounterpartofaFeudalManor，butthereasonofthecorrespondenceisonlynowbeginningtodawnuponus，whichis，thatbothofthemwereintheiroriginbodiesofassumedkinsmensettledonlandandundergoingthesametransmutationofideasthroughthefactofsettlement。ThehistoryofthelargergroupsendsinthemodernnotionsofCountryandSovereignty；thehistoryofthesmallerinthemodernnotionsofLandedProperty。Thetwocoursesofhistoricaldevelopmentwereforalongwhilestrictlyparallel，thoughtheyhaveceasedtobesonow。