The Anatomy of Revolution [Mass Market Paperback]

Crane Brinton (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: August 12, 1965 | ISBN-10: 0394700449 | ISBN-13: 978-0394700441 | Edition: Revised

A comparative history of the English, American, French and Russian revolutions. Bibliographical appendix, index.

Editorial Reviews

From the Inside Flap

A comparative history of the English, American, French and Russian revolutions. Bibliographical appendix, index.

Product Details

• Mass Market Paperback: 320 pages
• Publisher: Vintage; Revised edition (August 12, 1965)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0394700449
• ISBN-13: 978-0394700441
• Product Dimensions: 4.2 x 0.7 x 6.9 inches
• Shipping Weight: 7 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.8 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (24 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #33,106 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

25 of 26 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars a little contrived, July 29, 2003

By 

doc peterson (Portland, Oregon USA) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)    (TOP 1000 REVIEWER)   

This review is from: The Anatomy of Revolution (Mass Market Paperback)

Brinton's Anatomy of a Revolution is based on a brilliant premise - that all revolutions go through specific "stages." Using the English, French, and Russian revolutions and the American War for Independence as his models, he seeks to show common threads between the four of them.

However, there are some flaws in his thesis. As one reader pointed out, Brinton never defines what a "revolution" is - a problem especially given the fact that many do not consider the American Revolution a revolution at all. But beyond this point, there are problems as well. His model does not fit each revolution very well - especially the English Revolution's "Thermidorian Reaction" (which Brinton uses to describe the "calm" after the relative chaos and violence one usually associates with revolution.) His argument on the origins of revolution is similarly does not fit all revolutions well.

However, it is a fascinating read, and Brinton does a remarkable job in briefly and succinctly summarizing each revolution, their causes and the major players and events in them. This, if for no other reason makes it a worthwhile read.

22 of 23 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Helping Social Studies teachers since the early 60s, November 9, 2002

By 

Nicholas Antonucci "Nic" (Southold, New York United States) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: The Anatomy of Revolution (Mass Market Paperback)

A former teacher, who had used this book in the mid-sixties in her social studies class, introduced me to Crane Brinton's work. The Anatomy of Revolution provides the perfect companion for high school educators who want to step away from the stodgy lecture method of teaching the English, French, American, and Russian revolutions. The book is invaluable for assisting in creating lesson plans that discuss the characteristics and commonalities of revolutions. Once learned, a model can be created that students can use to analyze and evaluate any of the world's major and minor revolutions. Crane Brinton's book is a "must have" for any high school social studies teacher interested in creating similar lessons on the topic of revolution that foster higher levels of learning.

12 of 12 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars THE GRANDDADDY OF THE SOCIOLOGY OF REVOLUTIONS, February 25, 2007

By 

Alfred Johnson (boston, ma) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: The Anatomy of Revolution (Mass Market Paperback)

I have always been an avid student of the great modern revolutions both as a matter of practical politics and in order to glean some insights into how they have affected human history. In short, how the ideas and practice of those revolutions have acted as nodal points on the further progress of humankind. Crane Brinton's little book was probably the first book I read that tried to put that idea into some kind of order. While some of the material in the book is dated and some has been superseded by events and further research every serious student of comparative revolutions depends in some way or another on his pioneering methodology.

Brinton took the four great revolutions of his time (the Chinese Revolution had not occurred when he originally wrote the book)-the English of the 17th century, the French and American of the 18th century and the Russian of the 20th century and drew some common conclusions from them. Here the American Revolution acted as a kind of control for viewing the others. While no one would deny that each great revolution had its own perculiarities some lessons, so to speak, can be drawn from the various experiences.

Brinton traced the role of ideas, all kinds of ideas, some fanciful some serious that accompanied the dawn of every pre-revolutionary period as those who want to make a revolution or at least change things got a hearing from layers of society that they would not have gotten in more stable times. He also noted that the old regimes had run out of steam both in ideas and personnel, as exemplified by those who ruled at the time of revolutionary upheaval.

While the spark that ignited each revolution had different causes the revolutionary process itself started out as a broad coalition of forces opposed, for various reasons, to the old regime. Then a process of differentiation occured where various more moderate or modest revolutionary types fell by the wayside or were pushed aside under pressure from the more plebian masses and those committed to see the revolution through to the end, the Cromwells, the Robsepierres and the Lenins. During the course of these changes the counter-revolution, usually aided by foreign powers, reared its head.

I want to give particular attention to the question of Thermidor- that is the point where the revolution itself loses steam. The term stems from that point in the French Revolution in 1794 where the extreme left under Robespierre was defeated by more moderate forces within his own party (the Jacobins) and while not returning back to the old regime most definitely marked the end of progressive social experimentation. This has always been a thorny question on the political left. The Bolsheviks, particularly Trotsky, in the period of decline of the Russian Revolution poured out reams of polemics on its meaning (and even its applicability to their revolution). There are various causes for Thermidor; the leadership cadre gets tired, complacent or dies defending the revolution against counter-revolution; the people who previously supported the more extreme measures act likewise; and, those who want to stop the revolution in its tracks find a voice for their frustrations.

That much is clear from Brinton. What may need some revising is the question of whether in light of the destruction of the Soviet Union in 1991-92 and the return to capitalism there and the reverses in the Chinese Revolution which place it on the road back to capitalism that the previous premise about not going back to the old regime still holds true. The only way out of that dilemma is to argue that in neither case has the situation returned to the semi-feudal state before those revolutions. In any case, while you will need to read other books on comparative revolutions this is the place to start.