(1) Nettl, J. P. and Robertson, R., Industrialization, Development or Modernisation, B.J.S., XVII (1966), pp. 274–291.Google Scholar

(2) Cf. Shaheen, S., The Communist Theory of Self-Determination (The Hague, van Hoeve, 1956)Google Scholar, and Davies, H. B., Nations, Colonies and Social Classes: the position of Marx and Engels, Science and Society, XXIX (1965), 26–43.Google Scholar

(3) Cf. Eisenstadt, S. N., Modernisation, Protest and Change (Englewood Cliffs, Prentice-Hall, 1965).Google Scholar

(4) Minogue, K., Nationalism (London, Batsford, 1967), chap. I.Google Scholar

(5) Bauer, O., Die Nationalitätenfrage und die Sozialdemokratie (Vienna, Volksbuchhandlung, 1924)Google Scholar is the main text to which the Bolsheviks replied in Stalin, J.'s Marxism and the National Question (1913)Google Scholar, reprinted in Stalin, J., Marxism and the National and Colonial Question (London, Lawrence and Wishart, 1936).Google Scholar

(6) Kedourie, E., Nationalism (London, Hutchinson, 1960).Google Scholar

(7) Kohn, H., The Idea of Nationalism (New York, Macmillan, 1958)Google Scholar, and Id.Nationalism (Princeton, van Nostrand, 1955).Google Scholar

(8) Martins, H., “Developmental Nationalism” in Brazil, Soc. Review Monograph, XI (1967), 153–172.Google Scholar

(9) Akzin, B., State and Nation (London, Hutchinson, 1964.)Google Scholar

(10) This is a widely held, if tacit, assumption. It is clearly brought out by Gellner, E., Thought and Change (London, Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1964).Google Scholar India is a good example of its strengths and weaknesses: is it not arbitrary to deny then ame ‘nationalism’ to the pan-Indian National Congress movement, in order to bestow it upon the strictly linguistic state nationalisms now troubling India? Cf. Harrison, S., India, The Most Dangerous Decades (Princeton, University Press, 1960)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, for a pessimistic analysis.

(11) Cf. Binder, L., The Ideological Revolution in the Middle East (New York, John Wiley, 1964).Google Scholar

(12) Young, C. M., Politics in the Congo (Princeton, University Press, 1965).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

(13) Switzerland is a case of a nationstate with four linguistic, but one ‘political’, culture. In the Second World War, it stressed the cultural dissimilarity between its Alemmanic majority, and the contiguous Germans, by intensifying its attachment to its dialect. Cf. Siegfried, A., Switzerland (London, Cape, 1950)Google Scholar, Weilenmann, H., Pax Helvetica (Zurich, E. Rentsch, 1951)Google Scholar, and Kohn, H., Nationalism and Liberty, op. cit.Google Scholar Recently, the cultural equilibrium has been ruffled by the small, but vociferous, movement for secession from the German-speaking Protestant Berne canton by the involuntarily incorporated French-speaking Jurassiens. Cf. La Suisse, 27 07 1967Google Scholar, following de Gaulle's speech in Quebec.

(14) The expression is W. Zartmann's in Lewis, W. H., French-Speaking Africa (New York, Walker, 1965).Google Scholar

(15) The most consistent ‘ethnicist’ is Akzin, for whom the Ghanaian or Indonesian state nationalism is really a case of ‘patriotism’, devotion to the state and its rulers (op. cit.). He evades obvious difficulties presented by ‘pre-independence’ African nationalisms by minimizing the role of territorial movements, and explaining them as the application to the balkanised colonies of one, solidary ethnic movement along colour lines, i.e. pan-Africanism. There is considerable historical truth in this account (cf. Legum, C., Pan-Africanism, London, Pall Mall, 1965)Google Scholar, but I feel that Rotberg's sociological explanation in terms of the colony-generated solidarities provides a more adequate explanation of the form, and much of the content, of African nationalisms. Racial discrimination was, after all, perceived in the setting of the territorial colony (with its variations) and attributed to its power. Cf. Rotberg, R. I., African Nationalism, Concept or Confusion? J. of Modern African Studies, IV (1966), pp. 33–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar; also Mazrui, A., Pax Africana (London, Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1966), chap. 111.Google Scholar

(16) Cf. Rotberg, R. I., op. cit.Google Scholar, for the useful concept, “nation of intent”.

(17) Coleman, J. S., African Nationalism, A.P.S.R., XLVIII (1954), 404–426Google Scholar, has distinguished this ‘archaic’ phase; cf. also von der Mehden, F., Nationalism and Religion in South-East Asia (Madison, University of Wisconsin Press, 1963).Google Scholar

(18) Cf. Symmons-Symonolewicz, K., Nationalist Movements. An attempt at a comparative typology, Comp. Stud, in Soc. and Hist., VII (1965), 221–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar, for a typology which lays more stress on the nature of the groups for whom the nationalists strive. His main ‘majority/minority’ distinction corresponds to the ‘pre/post’- independence axis used here but his attempt to build on Wirth's ‘minority’ type, as opposed to a ‘liberation’ category or stage for those capable of achieving independence, involves a dubious retrospective historical determinism, and minimises the role of ‘colonial’ movements. Once again, the European ethnocentrism involved in ‘nationalism’ intrudes into the sociologist's analysis. Cf. Wirth, L., Types of Nationalism, A.j.S., XLI (1936), 783–737.Google Scholar

(19) Worsley, P., The Third World (London, Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1964), chap. 11, for this distinction.Google Scholar

(20) There seems no justification for denying the name ‘nationalism’ to these movements, as some wish (Symmons-Symonolewicz, , op. cit.).Google Scholar

(21) The ‘mixed category also includes cases where two, or even more, ‘strategic’ ethnic groups compete for power in the colony.

(22) Geertz, C., The Integrative Revolution, in Geertz, C. (ed.), Old Societies and New States (New York, Free Press of Glencoe, 1963).Google Scholar

(23) Coleman, J. S., Nigeria, Background to Nationalism (Los Angeles/Berkeley, University of California Press, 1958)Google Scholar (esp. Appendix) lists five such circles for the Nigerian intelligentsia. While there may be powerful reasons why one of these should win out, in the particular circumstances, it simply cannot be predicted without empirical investigation. If the Ibo succeed, their's will be as ‘genuine’ a nationalism as the Nigerian federalists', or vice versa; the same is true if they fail. What matters is whether the participants are fighting for the idea of a ‘nation’ with all the aspirations we saw this conception to entail. If it can be established that, like the Berber followers of Abd-el-Krim in the 1920's, they were not, but only out of local grievances exclusively (there is often a mixture of motives and aspirations), then we may deny the title.

(24) Cf. Kedourxe, , op. cit. p. 101.Google Scholar

(25) Kornhauser, W., The Politics of Mass Society (New York, Free Press of Glencoe, 1959)Google Scholar; also Halpern, M.'s more Mannheimian perspective in his Politics of Social Change in the Middle East and North Africa (Princeton, Princeton University, 1963), esp. chap. x.Google Scholar

(26) For a critique of ‘mass society’ theory, cf. Gusfield, J., Mass Society and Extremist Politics, A.S.R., XXVII (1962), 19–30.Google Scholar

(27) Cf. Worsley, , op. cit.Google Scholar, which ‘politicizes’ the Leninist ‘economism’.

(28) Kautsky, J. (ed.), Political Change in Underdeveloped Countries (New York, John Wiley, 1962)Google Scholar, a typical specimen of the failure of ‘interest group’ theory to take the institutional and normative frameworks, in this case the colonial state and the traditional religion, into account, with reductionist consequences.

(29) Lerner, D., The Passing of Traditional Society (New York, Free Press of Glencoe, 1958)Google Scholar; Deutsch, K., Nationalism and Social Communication (New York, John Wiley, 1953).Google Scholar

(30) Gusfield, J., Tradition and Modernity, A.J.S., LXXII (1967), 351–362.Google Scholar

(31) Gellner, , op. cit. chap. vii.Google Scholar

(32) For this concept, which should be differentiated from the more universal stratum of ‘intellectuals’, cf. Gellner, , op. cit.Google Scholar, Bottomore, T. B., Elites and Society (London, Watts, 1964)Google Scholar; cf. especially Shils, E., Intellectuals in the Political Development of New States, World Politics, XII (1960), 329–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Seton-Watson, H., Neither War, Nor Peace (London, Methuen, 1960)Google Scholar, chap. vi “The Intelligentsia”; and Bennigsen, A., Quelquejay, C., Islam in the Soviet Union (London, Pall Mall, 1966)Google Scholar, passim (esp. parts 1, IV).