There is clearly much in RenanвЂ™s view that needs to be revised or rejected, especially in the light of the atrocious crimes committed in the name of nations in the 20 th century. вЂњForgetting, I would even say historical error,вЂќ Renan writes, вЂњis an essential factor in the creation of a nation, and it is for this reason that the progress of historical studies often poses a threat to nationality.вЂќ National unity, he believes, is always вЂњbrutally established.вЂќ Violence вЂ“ war, vengeance, terror, maybe even extermination вЂ“ has gone into its making.

Mythic above all because it is built on an act of forgetting. The nation survives, therefore, only by virtue of the express will of the people to continue a common life but the validation of that common life, Renan thinks, relies on an understanding that is more mythic than historical. вЂњA nation is a soul,вЂќ he says, вЂњa spiritual principle.вЂќ This soul has two constitutive elements, the first concerning the past, that is, having вЂњcommon glories,вЂќ or вЂњa rich legacy of memories,вЂќ and the other concerning the present, namely the desire to continue investing in this heritage. These, he thinks, are mere вЂњmetaphysical and theological abstractions.вЂќ Yet, even though Renan may count as the first of the great constructivists вЂ“ those, that is, who see the nation as an invented or imagined cultural unit rather than one given by nature вЂ“ his empirical view of national identity still has a certain mystical ring to it. In his 1882 lecture вЂњWhat is a nation?вЂќ French historian Ernest Renan examines a number of essentialist theories offered in explanation of the вЂњright of nationsвЂќ вЂ“ unity of race, common language, religious affinity, natural geographical frontiers вЂ“ and he rejects them all.

Humankind be both shirt