I chose to analyze The World: A History by Filipe Fernandez Armesto. This source is a textbook, so it cannot exactly go into a very great amount of detail on every single topic in history (otherwise it would be an encyclopedia, not a textbook). This source does, however, provide a fairly good amount of information on the French Revolution.
Mr. Armesto’s textbook does do several things very well. It does explain some of the causes of the French Revolution, such as the pent up rage of the peasants over high taxes and their desire to be released from the “traditional obligations of peasants and the traditional privileges of lord’s…” (Armesto 758). This source also highlights the major eras and phases of the revolution. The text moves from the eras of the Liberal Revolution (1789-1792), to the Radical Revolution (1793-1794), to the Thermidorian Reaction (1795-1798), and finally to the Napoleonic Era (1799-1815). It talks about some of the different developments during the French Revolution, such as the ‘imprisonment’ of Louis XVI by the National Assembly and the eventual execution of the whole royal family in 1793. This text also talks about the primary figures in the Revolution, such as Louis XVI, Napoleon, and some of the radical revolutionaries like Marquis de Sade. This source also uses more casual explanations of the Revolution to creative a solid, cohesive narrative. He highlights only the bigger, more important parts of the Revolution and focuses less on random trivia and facts, which lends itself to the production of a cohesive narrative. Finally, this source is a pretty authoritative one (it is a textbook, after-all).
There are a few shortcomings to this source. While it does provide a large amount of information, I don’t think that it goes into enough detail regarding some of the developments presented in the book. For example, while it can be inferred from the line “In 1793, the royal family was executed” (758) that Louis XVI was executed in 1793, the text does not specifically state this. I think that this event must be stated explicitly, due to the importance of the event in the Revolution and in history as a whole, since it is one of the first times that a monarch was executed by the people of his state (Charles I of England has the dubious honor of being the first to claim this achievement). This source does not present any real argument regarding the French Revolution, only presents the fact that it happened. It talks about some of the events of the Revolution, some of the major factors that led to the Revolution, and the major eras, developments, and individuals of the Revolution, but never does it present and argument on the Revolution. Since the source does not even present an argument on the revolution, it does not use its authoritative position as a textbook to buttress its argument. It does, however, use its authoritative status to buttress its explanation of the French Revolution (causes, effects, etc.).
Leave a comment