An essential feature of the oral history project is the comparability of material once it has been collected. It should be made clear that for comparative analysis it is not essential (although it makes the work easier, if this has already been standardized) for all categories of data collection to be standardized in all countries studied; it is essential only that a full picture of all significant aspects of each movement will be covered--a task, as Professor Blanksten suggests, made easier by some forethought as to which categories should be covered in the interview. We assume that the categories not covered but very important in one or two countries will be recorded there if the interviewers perform their roles adequately.

Certainly there are a number of extremely interesting problems that comparison would solve. What are the different speeds with which success or failure of these movements occurs? Why did some simply die out, others become dominant and successful, while still others become separatist tribal groups? If we use Professor Zolberg's categories plus others that turn up in the pilot study, and take account of Professor Cohen's strictures concerning quantification, then some answers may be forthcoming.