TOW #8 (The Anatomy of Revolution) (IRB 1 Part 2)

After now having read Crane Brinton’s The Anatomy of Revolution in its entirety, I feel rather more learned in the subject of revolutions than I was before picking it up. My goal in reading it was to be able to draw parallels amongst the revolutions Brinton discussed and others that we study in school, especially American conflicts that could be considered “revolutions,” as we cover those topics in AP United States History. I am now better prepared to do so.

It is rich in historical examples and primary source quotations, both of which help to establish Crane Brinton’s credibility, displaying extraordinary research. However, due to the many historical references, I felt almost as if I did not know enough to read the book. I have studied each of the revolutions he discussed in what I thought was great depth, aside from the Russian Revolution, which we covered only briefly in AP European History. Brinton quickly references, for example, the “knights’ fees, ship money, benevolences, Star Chamber, Court of High Commission…” (Brinton 240) in order to prove a further point. The terms are simply listed, not explained, and I spent the book rifling through my brain and my binder to assist my comprehension. Thus, it was a rather slow read for me, as I had to keep stopping. High school students were probably not an audience he sought to reach: he likely aimed to connect with fellow historians and professors through his work. In that he was successful, as I was delighted to see a section of the book I had recently read quoted in my AP United States History textbook.

Something I found interesting about the book was Brinton’s constant reference to the contemporary United States as he was writing it, and more so as he was revising it (the book was originally published in 1938 and revised in 1965). For example, he rather suddenly amidst an analysis of French philosophes brings up the assassination of Kennedy. He follows this, and most of his other interjections about present (for him) United States, with a reassurance: “Something that must exist in the social tensions, the class struggles of a society really on the eve of revolution, seems to be missing in the United States” (Brinton 59). It is almost as if he is trying to reassure contemporary readers that the United States will not have a revolution. Given the circumstances of the time, with the many student protests and race riots, it seems logical that he would write to reassure. It is interesting that this purpose, clearly not as much present in the original, was prominent in his second release of the book. While his purpose in publishing the original was to examine the similarities of revolutions, the second addition perhaps had this secondary agenda, an strange, yet logical idea to me.