The doctrine of the "just war" has a hallowed place in the history of political and legal thought, while its more inflammatory counterpart, "revolutionary war," cannot call upon such a long and distinguished pedigree. This is not so surprising as it may at first seem since the doctrine of the "just war," or its momentary variation, has proved flexible enough to accommodate all sorts of wars for every kind of reason. I am prepared to argue that the claimants for either doctrine base their reasons for waging wars on similar, if not identical, principles. Hence the concept of "revolutionary war," to the extent that it may be a discernible and separate concept, can be subsumed in most cases under the general category of the "just war." What has happened in the long history of institutionalized warfare among nations is that the underlying reasons for legitimizing war have been overwhelmed by legal norms — a legal edifice so to speak — that have of necessity favored the established authorities.