The events of 1989, from the Soviet elections in March to the revo-
lutions of Berlin and Prague in November, reminded many people
of 1848. To my mind, a more apt comparison would be 1919, the
year in which three multinational empires were dissolved and the
map of Europe was altered as never before.

This first reaction to the events of 1989 gave way over the fol-
lowing months to calm reflection on European history. Working
backward in time, I asked myself why the Europe of the Treaty of
Versailles ended tragically in the Second World War, and why the
First World War brought about the fall of the Austro-Hungarian
Empire, and whether one shouldn't look for the cause of such
events in the revolution of 1848 or, even, that of 1789.

Returning to more recent events, I wondered finally if one
shouldn't interpret the division of Europe following the Second
World War into two major ideological "empires" as the logical
reaction to the nongovemability of nations and their inability to
live together in reasonable harmony. But if that were the case --
and here my reflections led me back to the events of 1989 -- then
why today does one part of Europe appear to be returning to the
very nationalism that was twice the cause of its own destruction?

None of my queries is particularly original, but rarely does a
historian ask innovative questions. Rather, the historian's contri-
bution lies in his or her particular vision of events and the way in
which contemporary experience continually demands reopening
and rereading the book of the past.

Even if I have relegated them to the final pages of my volume,
the national revolutions of 1989 and the collapse of the Soviet
Union in 1991 are the real protagonists of this book. It outlines the
history of the European nation-state from its birth between 1789
and 1848 to its zenith in 1919, its death in 1945, and its resurrection
in 1989.

-viii-