The _analytical character_ of the realm of eternal objects is the primary metaphysical truth concerning it. By this character it is meant that the status of any eternal object _A_ in this realm is capable of analysis into an indefinite number of subordinate relationships of limited scope. For example if _B_ and _C_ are two other eternal objects, then there is some perfectly definite relationship _R(A, B, C)_ which involves _A, B, C_ only, as to require the mention of no other definite eternal objects in the capacity of relata. Of course, the relationship _R(A, B, C)_ may involve subordinate relationships which are themselves eternal objects, and _R(A, B, C)_ is also itself an eternal object. Also there will be other relationships which in the same sense involve only _A, B, C_. We have now to examine how, having regard to the internal relatedness of eternal objects, this limited relationship _R(A, B, C)_ is possible. The reason for the existence of finite relationships in the realm of eternal objects is that relationships of these objects among themselves are entirely unselective, and are systematically complete. We are discussing possibility; so that every relationship which is possible is thereby in the realm of possibility. Every such relationship of each eternal object is founded upon the perfectly definite status of that object as a relatum in the general scheme of relationships. This definite status is what I have termed the ‘relational essence’ of the object. This relational essence is determinable by reference to that object alone, and does not require reference to any other objects, except those which are specifically involved in its individual essence when that essence is complex (as will be explained immediately). The meaning of the words ‘any’ and ‘some’ springs from this principle—that is to say, the meaning of the ‘variable’ in logic. The whole principle is that a particular determination can be made of the _how_ of some definite relationship of a definite eternal object _A_ to a definite finite number _n_ of other eternal objects, _without_ any determination of the other _n_ objects, X1, X2, ... Xn, except that they have, each of them, the requisite status to play their respective parts in that multiple relationship. This principle depends on the fact that the relational essence of an eternal object is not unique to that object. The mere relational essence of each eternal object determines the complete uniform scheme of relational essences, since each object stands internally in all its possible relationships. Thus the realm of possibility provides a uniform scheme of relationships among finite sets of eternal objects; and all eternal objects stand in all such relationships, so far as the status of each permits.