Patriotism is, and must be, the desire for the progress and welfare of the whole nation, without any regard whatsoever to the conditions under which that progress takes place, and without any prejudice in favour either of self-government or of outside control.  I have no hesitation in saying that the patriotic Pole is he who is in favour of Russian or German control of his country’s affairs; for history has told him quite plainly that he cannot manage them himself.  The Nationalist in any country runs the risk of being the poorest patriot in the land, for his continuous cry is for self-government, without any regard to the question as to whether such government will be beneficial to his nation in the long-run.

The value of history to patriotism, then, is to be assessed under two headings.  In the first place, history defines the attitude which the patriot should assume.  It tells him, in the clear light of experience, what is, and what is not, good for his nation, and indicates to him how much he may claim for his country.  And in the second place, it gives to the patriots of those nations which have shown capacity and ability in the past a confidence in the present; it permits in them the indulgence of that enthusiasm which will carry them, sure-footed, along the path of glory.

Archaeology, as the discovery and classification of the facts of history, is the means by which we may obtain a true knowledge of what has happened in the past.  It is the instrument with which we may dissect legend, and extract from myth its ingredients of fact.  Cold history tells the Greek patriot, eager to enter the fray, that he must set little store by the precedent of the deeds of the Trojan war.  It tells the English patriot that the “one jolly Englishman” of the old rhyme is not the easy vanquisher of the “two froggy Frenchmen and one Portugee” which tradition would have him believe.  He is thus enabled to steer a middle course between arrant conceit and childish fright.  History tells him the actual facts:  history is to the patriot what “form” is to the racing man.

In the case of the English (Heaven be praised!) history opens up a boundless vista for the patriotic.  The Englishman seldom realises how much he has to be proud of in his history, or how loudly the past cries upon him to be of good cheer.  One hears much nowadays of England’s peril, and it is good that the red signals of danger should sometimes be displayed.  But let every Englishman remember that history can tell him of greater perils faced successfully; of mighty armies commanded by the greatest generals the world has ever known, held in check year after year, and finally crushed by England; of vast fleets scattered or destroyed by English sailors; of almost impregnable cities captured by British troops.  “There is something very characteristic,” writes Professor Seeley,[1] “in the indifference which we show towards the mighty phenomenon of the diffusion of our race and the expansion of our state.  We seem, as it were, to have conquered and peopled half the world in a fit of absence of mind.”