ABSTRACT
The distinction seems to be that tribes are generally seen as smaller, less organized or more 'primitive,' and more closely based on kinship than are nations. The children or grandchildren of immigrants may feel just as much solidarity, while not even noticing the implications of talking about their forefathers. Though medieval historians generally write about barbarian 'tribes' rather than 'nations,' and some now prefer 'ethnic groups' or the apparently noncommittal 'peoples,' the barbarians generally occupy an important place at or near the beginning of most 'national histories.' The origin of the ideas falls well outside the scope of the essay, but something about the climate in which they appeared is relevant to the historiography of nationalism. Apart from any question of relation to the barbarians of the Age of Migrations, and their relation to Tacitus' Germani, there is one old assumption that is still sufficiently prevalent to be worth questioning.
