Book Reviews: The Anatomy of Revolution. By CRANE BRINTON. (New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Revised Edition. 1952. Pp. xi, 324. $5.00.)

• Author: John Paul Duncan
• DOI: 10.1177/106591295200500421
• Date: 01 December 1952
• Published date: 01 December 1952
• Subject Matter: Articles

676

The

Anatomy

of

Revolution.

By

CRANE

BRINTON.

(New

York:

Prentice-

Hall,

Inc.

Revised

Edition.

1952.

Pp.

xi,

324.

$5.00.)

In

1938

Crane

Brinton

first

proposed

in

book

form

his

theory

of

revolution.

This

revised

edition

gives

especial

attention

to

the

Russian

Revolution

on

a

basis

of

the

continued

Terror,

the

abnormal

isolation

of

the

country

and

other

factors.

Bibliographical

suggestions

have

been

brought

up

to

date

and

factual

data

strengthened.

The

basic

analysis

remains.

Considering

the

assumptions,

modifica-

tions

and

exceptions

indicated,

it

is

one

with

which

it

is

hard

to

disagree.

It

rests

upon

the

assumption

that

historical,

generally

observable

ex-

periences

are

valid

data

for

the

scientific

method.

However,

this

method,

according

to

Brinton,

is

not

that

of

&dquo;self-styled

’scientific’

materialists,

positivists,

empiricists&dquo;

and

accepts

the

use

of

conceptual

schemes.

The

conceptual

scheme

used

here,

admitting

its

weaknesses,

is

the

fever.

That

is,

he

hypothesizes

that

certain

revolutions

are

like

fevers

and

he

proceeds

by

studying

history

to

ascertain

whether

this

be

true.

He

determines

that

generally

it

is.

The

particular

revolutions

with

which

he

deals

are

the

French,

English,

American,

and

Russian.

These

passed

through

relatively

similar

stages.

There

was

the

preliminary

period

when

widespread

dissatisfaction

developed,

the

old

regimes

were

unwilling

or

unable

to

make

acceptable

adjustments

and

intellectual

leadership

deserted.

Following,

came

the

Rule

of

the

Moderates,

the

Rule

of

the

Extremists,

the

Terror,

and

Thermidor

when

the

Terror

subsided

or

was

stopped

and

the

pre-

revolutionary

status

quo

partially

restored.

Brinton

is

aware

that

conservatives

will

use

this

analysis

to

suggest

that

revolutions

are

not

worth

the

trouble.

However,

he

believes

that

this

is

not

a

valid

conclusion

nor

one

that

necessarily

results.

Rather,

since

revolutions

do

not

completely

change

the

essential

network

of

people’s

lives,

they

do

not

wantonly

destroy.

Indeed,

they

sometimes

remove

a

great

deal

which

ought

to

be

removed.

Albeit,

he

does

not

condone

revolutions.

Implicitly,

he

is

beyond

them,

an

attitude

he

believes

the

social

scientist

must

ever

strive

to

maintain.

Considering

these

times

and

this

material,

he

does

achieve

a

relatively

high

degree

of

objectivity

in

a

book

which

strikes

a

happy

balance

between

academic

solidness,

accuracy,

and

high

readability.

The

bibliography

is

gratifyingly

suggestive.

Despite

this,

and

agreeing

that

the

analysis

is

generally

accurate,

this

reviewer

was

left

with

doubt

that

the

use

of

selected

historical

instances

is

as

scientifically

valid

as

Brinton

believes.

JOHN

PAUL

DUNCAN.

University

of

Oklahoma.