School of Government and Society

POLS G76H
Revolution and Enlightenment
(Political Ideas A)
2014/15

Lecturer: Dr Richard Shorten

CANVAS Virtual Learning Environment

Course List: https://canvas.bham.ac.uk/courses/
Canvas Help: https://canvas.bham.ac.uk/courses/185

08 23399 Revolution and Enlightenment (Political Ideas

A) POLS G76H
Synopsis
The course is focused around the study of Enlightenment and Revolution in the context of the modern political
ideas. It is organised both historically and thematically. Historically, it traces developments in the political
thought that gained expression in the eighteenth-century Enlightenment, through to the role of political ideas in
a combination of modern political events: the American Revolution and the French Revolution. Thematically,
the course examines, in turn, the nature of the Enlightenment; the comparison between the French and American
Revolutions; and the character of the counter-Enlightenment.
Extended overview
The first seminar on this module will provide an overview of the main themes of Enlightenment political
thought, and students are encouraged to begin by setting aside time to read Tzvetan Todorov, In Defence of the
Enlightenment (London: Atlantic, 2009; 161pp.). In the weeks that follow we read primary texts alongside key
secondary sources, in the three substantive sections of the module.
In the first part (The Enlightenment) we begin with Baron Charles de Montesquieu. Montesquieu was an early
Enlightenment author. His concern was principally with setting limits to arbitrary power, conceived as holding
out the threat of tyranny. The main question we will ask is whether fear can ever serve as an acceptable basis
for a political order. Rousseau, who we next look at, was equally a critic of tyranny, but his political thought
has given rise to more interpretive controversy. On the one hand, his portrait of natural man has been taken to
articulate a backward-looking position opposed to the Enlightenment mainstream. On the other, his doctrine of
the General Will and, moreover, his insistence on the importance of the expression of a single sovereign
consensus, were enthusiastically taken up by the most extremist factions of the French Revolution. How, if at
all, these two readings of Rousseau fit together will be the focus of our interest.
The second part of the module (Revolutions) looks closely at the political revolutions that Enlightenment
thought gave rise to, paying particular attention to how far these revolutions owed a debt to preceding political
thinkers. Initially, we focus on The Federalist Papers. The American Revolution had manifold sources but one
of these was Montesquieus ideas. We therefore spend time discussing how the Federalists conception of a
modern republic could possibly have been squared with Montesquieus misgivings about republican political
rule in a large, territorial state. Shifting our concern back to events in Europe, we then explore the political
theory of the French Revolution. The Abb Sieys pamphlet What is the Third Estate? serves as our
representative text, through which we shall consider the attempt to bring the abstractions of Rousseaus political
philosophy down to earth. Was a liberal outcome of the French Revolution ever possible, or did Rousseaus
influence set that outcome off-course from the beginning?
The final part (The Counter-Enlightenment) builds upon this last theme, and considers in particular the
connection between Counter-Enlightenment(s) and the fallout from disaffection with the French Revolution.
We read Edmund Burkes account in Reflections on the Revolution in France alongside some of the speeches of
Maximilien Robespierre to the National Assembly, on the topic of revolutionary violence. We then look at
Thomas Paines famous response to Burke in The Rights of Man. Ultimately, we conclude with Joseph de
Maistre, who is widely credited with having developed reactionary politics in a new key, even to the extent (on
the view of some critics) of prefiguring the ideological elements of fascism.
Organisation of seminars
Note that this is a political thought course and therefore that the close reading of historical texts is an integral
part of its delivery.
To this end, seminars combine discussion of primary texts with engagement in
contemporary debates. The format is a two hour session. The first hour will consist in a traditional lecture.
The second hour will be entirely given over to student-led discussion of both the reading and the themes raised
in the lecture in the preceding hour. Handouts will be distributed during seminars themselves and, thereafter,
will be available via Canvas. Seminar questions for discussion which, importantly, should be considered
alongside the key texts are listed in the remainder of this document.

Method of assessment
Assessment for this module takes the form of a single essay (comprising 100% of the mark). The essay should
be c. 5000 words in length. Students should set their own questions and agree them with the module convenor
prior to writing. Note that it is expected both that these questions engage issues covered in the module and that
answers make substantive reference to thinkers and texts discussed.
The essay is due on 12th January in the academic year 2014/15
The following are suggested as sample essay questions. Students should, though, try to devise and adapt their
own, with reference to subjects covered on the module that most engage their interests. Note that questions may
be either general in focus (e.g. Q1, Q2), or more specific (e.g. Q3, Q4, Q5).

Q1.

Is revolution the logical outcome of Enlightenment thought?

Q2.

Can the counter-Enlightenment be reduced to the critical response to the French Revolution?

Q3.

One longs, in reading your work, to walk on all fours. Is Voltaires remark on Rousseau an apt one?

Q4.

Is Burke a counter-Enlightenment figure, or does he represent one kind of Enlightenment in conflict

with another (J.G.A. Pocock)?

Q5.

Does Maistres antimodernism anticipate the ideas of fascism?

Lecture and seminar timetable

Week 1

Introduction. Political ideas in an Age of Revolution and Enlightenment

SECTION I:

The Enlightenment

Week 2

Montesquieu, the Enlightenment, and fear of despotism

Tensions within the Enlightenment the case of Jean-Jacques Rousseau

Week 3

SECTION II:

Revolutions

Week 4

The American Revolution and The Federalist Papers

Week 5

The French Revolution and the Third Estate

Week 6

Study week

SECTION III: The Counter-Enlightenment

Week 7

Edmund Burke and revolutionary violence

Week 8

Thomas Paine and the re-statement of radicalism

Week 9

Joseph de Maistre and the roots of fascism?

Week 10

Essay workshop

Readings for the course

The remainder of this document indicates the most important texts that will be of use in reading for this course.
They are divided roughly into three categories: (i) general sources which correspond to each section of the
module; (ii) key texts which are compulsory readings and which will form the primary focus in seminar
discussions; and (iii) further reading, with reference to each seminar topic. Note that wherever possible online
versions of texts are suggested and that (E) indicates a reading is available within the university librarys store
of electronic holdings.

General sources

SECTION I:

The Enlightenment

W. Connolly, Political Theory and Modernity

P. Gay, The Enlightenment, 2 Vols
G. Himmelfarb, Roads to Modernity: The British, French and American Enlightenments
N. Hampson, The Enlightenment
J.I. Israel, Radical Enlightenment: Philosophy and the Making of Modernity
Enlightenment Contested: Philosophy, Modernity, and the Emancipation of Man
A Revolution of the Mind: Radical Enlightenment and the Intellectual Origins of Modern Democracy
R. Porter, Enlightenment: Britain and the Creation of the Modern World
R. Porter and M. Teich (eds), The Enlightenment in National Context

SECTION II:

Revolutions

M. Albertone and D. Francesco (eds), Rethinking the Atlantic World: Europe and America in the Age of
Democratic Revolutions
H. Arendt, On Revolution
G. Best (ed), The French Revolution and its Legacy
F. Furet, The French Revolution, 1770-1814
Interpreting the French Revolution
F. Furet and M. Ozouf (eds), A Critical Dictionary of the French Revolution
J. Israel, Revolutionary Ideas: An Intellectual History of the French Revolution from The Rights of Man to
Robespierre
M. Malia, Historys Locomotives: Revolutions and the Making of the Modern World, esp. chs. 7-8
G. Kates (ed), The French Revolution: Recent Debates and New Controversies

SECTION III:

The Counter-Enlightenment

C. Becker, The Heavenly City of the Eighteenth-Century Philosophers.

I. Berlin, The Counter-Enlightenment in Against the Current: Essays in the History of Ideas
J. Femia, Against the Masses
G. Gerrard, Counter-Enlightenments: From the eighteenth century to the present
J. Gray, Enlightenments Wake
A.O. Hirshman, The Rhetoric of Reaction
Y. Levin, The Great Debate: Edmund Burke, Thomas Paine, and the Birth of the Right
J. Mali and R. Wokler (eds), Isaiah Berlins Counter-Enlightenment
D.M. McMahon, Enemies of the Enlightenment: The French Counter-Enlightenment and the Making of
Modernity
Z. Sternhell, The Anti-Enlightenment Tradition

Detailed course outline and reading list

Week 1

Introduction. Political ideas in an Age of Revolution and Enlightenment

This is an introductory overview of the module. There are no pre-set questions for discussion.
Supplementary reading
G. Garrard, Counter-Enlightenments: From the eighteenth century to the present
T. Todorov, In Defence of the Enlightenment *

SECTION I:

Week 2

The Enlightenment

Montesquieu, the Enlightenment, and fear of despotism

Key texts
Montesquieu, The Spirit of the Laws, (ed) A.M. Cohler, B.C. Miller & H.S. Stone (CUP), esp. Bks. I-III & Bk.
XI, Ch. 6. Also available at: http://www.constitution.org/cm/sol-02.htm
R. Boesche, Fearing Monarchs and Merchants: Montesquieus Two Theories of Despotism, Western Political
Quarterly, 43 (1990), 741-62 (E)
C. Robin, Reflections on Fear: Montesquieu in Retrieval, American Political Science Review, 94/2 (2000),
347-60 (E)
Seminar questions

How convincing is Montesquieus typology of regime-types?

Is despotism the worst of political evils?
Why should a separation of powers maximise the scope of individual freedom?
Should modern politics be based on a negative foundation/ fear?

Further reading
I. Berlin, Montesquieu in Against the Current
D. Carrithers, M. Mosher & P. Rahe (eds), Montesquieus Science of Politics: Essays on the Spirit of the Laws
P. Conroy, Montesquieu Revisited
R. Douglass, Montesquieu and Modern Republicanism, Political Studies, 60/3 (Oct 2012), 703-19 (E)
A. de Dijn, French Political Thought from Montesquieu to Tocqueville
R. Kingston (ed), Montesquieu and his Legacy
S.R. Krause, The Uncertain Inevitability of Decline in Montesquieu, Political Theory, 30/5 (Oct 2002), 702727 (E)
T. Pangle, Montesquieus Philosophy of Liberalism
P. A. Rahe, Montesquieu and the Logic of Liberty
, Soft Despotism, Democracys Drift: Montesquieu, Rousseau, Tocqueville, and the Modern Prospect
J. Shklar, Montesquieu
R. Shackleton, Montesquieu: A Critical Biography
C. de Montesquieu, Persian Letters

Week 3 Tensions within the Enlightenment the case of Jean-Jacques Rousseau

Key texts
J-J. Rousseau, Discourse on Inequality (Penguin) and The Social Contract (Penguin), esp. Bk. 1. Also available
at: http://www.constitution.org/jjr/ineq.htm and http://www.constitution.org/jjr/socon.htm
T. Furniss, Rousseau: Enlightened critic of the Enlightenment? in M. Fitzpatrick et al. (eds), The Enlightened
World (Canvas)
G. Garrard, Rousseau, Maistre, and the Counter-Enlightenment, History of Political Thought, XV/1 (1994),
97-120 (E)
Seminar questions

Is Rousseau a primitivist? Does his focus on sentiment place him outside the
Enlightenment?
To what extent does the General Will point to an illiberal strand of democratic
thought?
Does his conception of a civil religion introduce more problems than it solves?

Further reading
J. Charvet, The Social Problem in the Philosophy of Rousseau
J. Cohen, Rousseau: A Free Community of Equals
N. Dent, Rousseau
G. Garrard, Rousseaus Counter-Enlightenment
H. Gildin, Rousseau's Social Contract
V. Gourevitch, Rousseaus Pure State of Nature, Interpretation, 16/1 (1998), 23-59 (E)
J.C. Hall, Rousseau: An Introduction to his Political Philosophy
M. Hulliung, The Autocritique of the Enlightenment
T.E. Marshall, Rousseau and Enlightenment, Political Theory, 6/4 (Nov 1978), 421-55 (E)
R.D. Masters, The Political Philosophy of Rousseau
A.M. Melzer, The Natural Goodness of Man: On the System of Rousseaus Thought
J. Miller, Rousseau, Dreamer of Democracy
J.B. Noone, Rousseaus Social Contract
M. Viroli, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and the Well-Ordered Society
P. Riley, The General Will before Rousseau
J-J. Rousseau, Discourse on the Arts and Sciences
J.N. Shklar, Men and Citizens
J. Starobinski, Jean-Jacques Rousseau: Transparency and Obstruction
J. Swenson, On Jean-Jacques Rousseau: Considered as One of the First Authors of the Revolution
R. Wokler, Rousseau

SECTION II:

Week 4

Revolutions

The American Revolution and The Federalist Papers

Key texts
A. Hamilton, J. Madison and J. Jay, The Federalist Papers, esp.
http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa00.htm

No.s 1, 9, 10, 51.

Available at:

C. Sunstein, The Enlarged Republic Then and Now, New York Review of Books, LVI/5,
(2009), 45-48 (Canvas)
Seminar questions

Which is the dominant language of the American Revolution: liberalism or

republicanism?
Does Montesquieus thought better support the Federalist or the Anti-Federalist case?
How convincing is the Federalists claim to have provided for a republic in a modern
context?

Further reading

P. Abbott, Whats New in the Federalist Papers?, Political Research Quarterly, 49 (1996)
, Political Thought in America
J. Appleby, Liberalism and Republicanism in the Historical Imagination
B. Bailyn, The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution
G. Dietze, The Federalist: A Classic on Federalism and Free Government
D. Epstein, The Political Theory of the Federalist
M. Forsyth, Alexander Hamilton, James Jay and James Madison: The Federalist in Forsyth, Keens-Soper &
Hoffman (eds), The Political Classics: Hamilton to Mill
A. Gibson, Ancients, Moderns and Americans: The Republicanism-Liberalism Debate Revisited, History of
Political Thought, 21/2 (2000), 261-307
I. Hampsher-Monk, A History of Modern Political Thought, Ch. 5
S. Kernell (ed), James Madison: The Theory and Practice of Republican Government

L. Hartz, American Political Thought and the American Revolution, American Political
Science Review, 46/2 (1952), 321-342
J. Levy, Beyond Publius: Montesquieu, Liberal Republicanism and the Small-Republic
Thesis, History of Political Thought, 27/1 (2006), 50-90
B. Manin, Checks, balances and boundaries: the separation of powers in the constitutional
debate of 1787 in B. Fontana (ed), The Invention of the Modern Republic, 27-62 *
I. McLean, Before and After Publius: The Sources and Influence of Madisons Political Thought in S. Kernell
(ed), James Madison: The Theory and Practice of Republican Government, 14-40
M. White, Philosophy, The Federalist and the Constitution
S. Wolin, Montesquieu and Publius: The Crisis of Reason and The Federalist Papers, in The Presence of the
Past: Essays on the State and the Constitution

J. Zvesper, The America founders and classical political thought, History of Political
Thought, 10/4 (1989), 701-718

Week 5

The French Revolution and the Third Estate

Key texts

Sieys, What is the Third Estate? in Political Writings, (ed) M. Sonenscher, Chs. 1-3, 5
(Canvas)
K.M. Baker, Constitution in G. Kates (ed), The French Revolution: Recent Debates and
New Controversies (Canvas)
Seminar questions
-

In what sense is the Third Estate a complete nation?

Is representation a feature of all social experience?
Are politicians entitled to speak on behalf of the people?
Does Sieys move beyond the difficulties associated with a General Will?
Is constitution-making itself unconstitutional? If so, what problems does this pose?

Further reading
K.M. Baker, Representation redefined in K.M. Baker, Inventing the French Revolution (reprinted in K.M.
Baker (ed), The French Revolution and the Creation of Modern Political Culture, Vol.1).
, The Idea of a Declaration of Rights in G. Kates (ed), The French Revolution: Recent Debates and New
Controversies

, The Political Languages of the French Revolution, in M. Goldie and R. Wokler (eds),
The Cambridge History of Eighteenth-Century Political Thought
G.G. Van Deusen, Sieyes: His Life and his Nationalism
W. Doyle, Origins of the French Revolution
M. Forsyth, Reason and Revolution. The Political Thought of the Abb Sieys
, Emmanuel Siyes: What is the Third Estate? in M. Forsyth, M. Keens-Soper & J. Hoffman (eds), The
Political Classics: Hamilton to Mill
D. Gordon, Citizens without Sovereignty. Equality and Sociability in French Thought, 1670-1789
D. Van Kley (ed), The French Idea of Freedom. The Old Regime and the Declaration of Rights of 1789
P. Pasquino, The constitutional republicanism of Emmanuel Sieyes in B. Fontana (ed), The Invention of
Modern Republic
W. Sewell, A Rhetoric of Bourgeois Revolution: The Abb Sieys and What is the Third Estate?
M. Sonenscher, Introduction in Sieys, Political Writings, M. Sonenscher (ed)

Week 6

Study week

10

SECTION III:

The Counter-Enlightenment

Week 7

Edmund Burke and revolutionary violence

Key texts
E. Burke, Reflections on the Revolution in France extracts (Canvas)
F. Ferguson, Burke and the Response to the Enlightenment, in M. Fitzpatrick et al. (eds), The Enlightenment
World (Canvas)
M. Robespierre, On the Principles of Political Morality that Should Guide the National Convention, in S.
Zizek (ed), Robespierre: Virtue and Terror (Canvas)
Seminar questions

In what ways did Burke prophecise the Terror of the French Revolution?
Does the language in which Burke depicts the French Revolution help his case?
Are metaphysics and abstract speculation dangerous features of modern political
experience? Is prejudice a more reliable guide to political conduct than reason?
How adequate (if at all) is Robespierres justification of the use of terror?

Further reading
D. Armitage, Edmund Burke and Reason of State, Journal of the History of Ideas, 61 (2000), 617-34
S. Ayling, Edmund Burke: His Life and Opinions

M. Butler (ed), Burke, Paine, Godwin, and the Revolution Controversy

D. Cameron, The Social Thought of Rousseau and Burke
M. Freeman, Edmund Burke and the Critique of Political Radicalism
I. Hampsher-Monk, Rhetoric and Opinion in the Politics of Edmund Burke, History of
Political Thought, 9/3 (1988), 455-84
M. Keens-Soper, Edmund Burke: Reflections on the Revolution in France in M. Forsyth, M. Keens-Soper & J.
Hoffman (eds), The Political Classics: Hamilton to Mill

F.P. Lock, Burkes Reflections on the Revolution in France

C.B. Macpherson, Burke
C.C. OBrien, The Great Melody
D.E. Ritchie (ed), Burke. Appraisals and Applications
T. Schofield, Conservative Political Thought in Britain in Response to the French Revolution, Historical
Journal, 29 (1986), 601-22

P.J. Stanlis, Edmund Burke. The Enlightenment and Revolution

J. Whale (ed), Edmund Burkes Reflections on the Revolution in France: New
Interdisciplinary Essays

11

Week 8

Thomas Paine and the re-statement of radicalism

Key texts
T. Paine, Rights of Man, Part I excerpts as selected in I. Hampsher-Monk (ed), The Impact of the French
Revolution, pp. 135-165 (Canvas)
C. Hitchens, The Rights of Man, Part One in Thomas Paines Rights of Man (Canvas)
Seminar questions
-

How could Paine and Burke have agreed on American independence but disagreed on the French
Revolution?
With reference to Paines critique of the hereditary principle: What (if any) claim do the dead have over the
living? Must historical precedent go all the way down? Can wisdom be inherited?
Are rights universal, or particular?
Is the Burke/Paine debate more rhetorical battle than struggle over values?

Further reading

A.J. Ayer, Thomas Paine

S. Blakemore, Intertextual War: Edmund Burke and the French Revolution in the Writings of
Mary Wollstonecraft, Thomas Paine and James Mackintosh
, Crisis in Representation: Thomas Paine, Mary Wollstonecraft, Helen Maria Williams
and the Rewriting of the French Revolution
F. Canavan, The Relevance of the Burke-Paine Controversy to American Political Thought,
Review of Politics, 49/2 (1987), 163-176
G. Claeys, Thomas Paine, Social and Political Thought
, The French Revolution Debate and British Political Thought, History of Political
Thought, 11 (1990), 59-80
I. Dyck (ed), Citizen of the World: Essays on Tom Paine
J. Fruchtman, The Political Philosophy of Thomas Paine
H. Harmer, Tom Paine: The Life of a Revolutionary

G. Kates, From Liberalism to Radicalism: Tom Paines Rights of Man, Journal of the
History of Ideas, 50/4 (1989), 569-587
J. Keane, Tom Paine: A Political Life
I. Kramnick, Tom Paine: Radical Liberal in Republicanism and Bourgeois Radicalism
B. Kuklick (ed), Thomas Paine
Y. Levin (2014) The Great Debate: Edmund Burke, Thomas Paine and the Birth of Right and Left
M. Morris, The Burke-Paine Controversy in The British Monarchy and the French Revolution, pp. 37-55

M. Philp, English Republicanism in the 1790s, Journal of Political Philosophy, 6/3 (1998),
235-262
A. Williamson, Thomas Paine: His Life, Work and Times

12

Week 9

Joseph de Maistre and the roots of fascism?

Key texts

J. de Maistre, Considerations on France, Chs. 1-3, 4-6, 9-10

I. Berlin, Joseph de Maistre and the Origins of Fascism in The Crooked Timber of Humanity (Canvas)
Seminar questions

Do the ideas of original sin and providence shed light on political experience?
Are revolutions sustained by a kind of inner logic?
Is Isaiah Berlins reading of Maistre a useful one?
Do books cause revolutions?

Further reading

P. Davies, The Extreme Right in France, 1789 to the Present

R. Fargher, Religious Reactions in Post-Revolutionary French Literature in N. Ashton (ed),
Religious Change in Europe, 1650-1914
G.Garrard, Isaiah Berlin's Joseph de Maistre, in J. Mali and R. Wokler (eds), Isaiah Berlin's
Counter- Enlightenment,
J.Godchot, The Counter-Revolution: Doctrine and Action, 1789-1804
J. Goldhammer, The Headless Republic: Sacrificial Violence in Modern French Thought
E. Greifer, Joseph de Maistre and the Reaction against the Eighteenth Century, American
Political Science Review, 15 (1961), 591-598
J. Heyward, After the French Revolution, Ch. 3
S. Holmes, Maistre and the Antiliberal Tradition in The Anatomy of Antiliberalism
R. Lebrun, (ed) Joseph de Maistres Life, Thought and Influence: Selected Studies
, Joseph de Maistre: An Intellectual Militant
C. Lombard, Joseph de Maistre
B. Owen, A Modern Maistre: The Social and Political Thought of Joseph de Maistre
E.D. Watt, The English Image of Joseph de Maistre, European Studies Review, 4 (1979),
239-259

Week 10

Essay workshop

The final seminar is set aside to give students some guidance as regards writing the essay for this module. In
particular, students should by this point have a clear idea of the question they intend to address, and the session
will be an opportunity to clarify question and approach.

13