Chapter 6 Chapter 4: The Transformation of the Concept of "Revolution"

A political revolution is usually thought of as a sudden, violent, and sweeping change, often accompanied by violence, or at least the use of force.There is a dramatic quality to such radical change, which often allows onlookers to see that a revolution is taking place, or that a revolution has just occurred.Class revolutions in the early modern era, such as the American Revolutionary War and the French Revolution, are both famous for changing political systems, and the French Revolution was more violent than the American Revolutionary War.In both cases, the government or ruler was overthrown and abandoned.Through the activities of the governed people or their representatives, a new government replaces the old one.To a certain extent, the same is true of the Glorious Revolution.

By the nineteenth century, revolutions and revolutionary activity began to move beyond purely political considerations of the form of government and began to delve into fundamentally political or socioeconomic spheres.As a result, the word "revolution" can be applied not only to events that lead to dramatic political or socioeconomic change, but also to activities (whether they have failed or not yet) that attempt to bring about such change.Thus, in the Communist Manifesto of 1848, Marx and Engels proposed a revolutionary blueprint and called for "a communist revolution", and a year later Marx pointed to "some symptoms of 1849" (1971 , 44): "Revolutionary uprising of the working class in France, and war worldwide."

Since the last century, revolution has been more than armed uprising, more challenge to established power, more than opposition or voluntary renunciation of loyalty or obedience to the government.That is, revolutions outnumber revolts and rebellions that do not necessarily lead to a new type of government or a new socioeconomic system. The replacement of one ruling family by another, or dynastic change, is no longer considered a revolution.In general, mere confrontation with those in power, especially overt and resorting to force, is only seen as rebellion - when rising up against those in power proves to be a failure in the short or long term case, especially so.For example, the American Civil War as we know it today was formerly known as the Civil War or the Rebellion, and Confederate soldiers were colloquially called Confederate soldiers by Northerners. (Yankee shouts were used to refer to the drawn-out shrieks of Confederate soldiers. The Egyptian Civil War was the clash between Royalist and Roundhead armies, and the sentencing of Charles I The death penalty, the founding of the republic, and the events associated with the Civil War were what the 18th-century historian and chronicler Clarendon called "the English Rebellion and the English Civil War."

The history of the concept of revolution cannot be separated from the history of the way the word itself is used.For the history of usage poses many questions that are closely related to the subject of scientific revolutions.First of all, the word "revolution" itself comes from Late Latin, as a noun, it is derived from the Latin verb "revolvere", which means "to make backward", thus "to unfold", "to read", " Repeat", and "deliberately consider"; thus, its further meaning is "return", "reoccurrence".Second, the noun "revolutio" ("revolving") is used as a technical term in astronomy (and mathematics) from medieval Latin.Third, the word "revolution" came to be used in a political sense to denote a contemporaneous process or rise and fall, which meant a restoration of some previous state, and ultimately a process of "overthrow".Fourth, the word "revolution" was associated with the overthrow process in the field of political affairs, and later, the meaning of "overthrow" no longer has the connotation that the word "revolution" expresses periodically; at the same time, "revolution" The word came to mean events in far the usual sense.In the development of reflection on revolution, it is of considerable importance to recognize early on that there had been a revolution in England (the Glorious Revolution of 1688) and that a revolution was afoot in science. At the beginning of the eighteenth century, revolution (in a sense very similar to how we use the word today) was seen to be not only about government, but also about the development of ideas and cultural enterprises, especially science; it was realized that by Newton's time, A revolution has taken place in science.This period is notable because at least three different scientists recognized that their individual research had the potential to lead (or is leading to) a scientific revolution.

During the last quarter of the eighteenth century, while the American War of Independence and the French Revolution demonstrated that revolutions were part of a continuous political and social process, Lavoisier announced a new revolution in science: chemistry revolution.By this time, too, it was generally acknowledged that there had been a Copernican revolution, a Newtonian revolution, and subsequent minor scientific revolutions. In the 19th and subsequent centuries, the word "revolution" was used to refer to a series of social and political revolutionary events, whether successful or not.Revolutionary theory itself is developed along with the formation of the revolutionary movement, in which theory is put into practice through the organized collective activity of those dedicated to the revolution.What arose first was the notion of a "permanent" (or ongoing or ongoing) revolution, rather than a revolution consisting of a series of events constitute a revolution.Successive revolutions, large and small, in the twentieth century have sharpened everyone's awareness that revolutions are a law of political, social and economic change, and today it is generally accepted that they are equally A law in scientific change.

ancient revolution The historical analysis of revolutions by scholars of political theory goes back at least as far as the philosophers Plato and Aristotle and the historians Herodotus and Thucydides.Although there were many undertakings in antiquity that might be called revolutions, the Greeks did not have an equivalent term for them.Greek philosophers and historians liked to use many different words to describe what we would call revolutionary uprising and change.Thus, "although the Greeks had many revolutions, they did not have a single word for them" (Hato 1949, 498). Compared with the understanding of the word since then, it is still a concept that is still unclear and not fully elaborated. Arthur Harto has conducted an important study on the early history of the term and the concept. Regarding Plato, Harto pointed out that "His ideal Congress degenerates into a politics of honor, which in turn degenerates into an oligarchy, and so on, and which, through democracy, degenerates into a tyranny" (ibid.). In this sense, his "revolution" is more Aptly called an evolution. Obviously, Plato himself did not actually conceive of such a complete cycle, and he did not believe that these events would repeat themselves again and again in succession, since this would require patriarchy to give way again. To the Republic. Polybius did this. Polybius claims that he summed up what Plato said. It was not Plato but Polybius who argued that imperial politics turned into "tyranny politics, tyranny becomes aristocracy, aristocracy becomes oligarchy, oligarchy becomes democracy"; Undoubtedly and inevitably leading to imperialism and a new cycle" (p. 499). In Polybius' own words, "This is the cycle of political revolution, the natural process in which the Regimes change, disappear, and eventually return to where they started. "The word "anakykloois" (derived from the stem kyklos, which means ring or wheel, is the root of the English word "cycle") was used by Libios to express this idea of ​​a cycle in terms of a spinning wheel; "Behind its whirling is impetus Fate" (or "Fate").

The fifth part of Aristotle's "Politics" discusses the problem of revolution, which contains criticism and resistance to the theory of revolution's circulation (V, 12, Vii).Aristotle's "idiomatic" term for "revolution" was "metabolekaistasis" (change with insurrection); for a process without violence, only the word "metabole" ("metabolism") was used.Hatto (p. 500) concludes that the Greeks clearly thought about the concept of revolution and lived through it.However, although a word can always be found to describe the concept or some phrase of the establishment, the Greek writers "did not always choose the same word, but sometimes two or more." The reason may be that, although They lived through many revolutions, both recent and earlier, but they were not witnesses to the "ancient revolutions" in the sense that Europe was "in the midst of the revolutions of 1789" (ibid.) .

Nor did the Romans have a specific word for "revolution" (Hato 1949, 500).In Latin, the closest thing to our "revolution" is "novaeres" (new things, innovations), but in reality it signifies what we would presumably call the results of a revolution.Among the phrases used to denote revolutionary activity are: "novisrebusstudere" (struggle for innovation), or "resnovare" (renovation), etc.Two other expressions of ancient origin are "mutatiorerum" (change of things) and "commutatioreipublicae" (change of government); preserved in the translation.

Cicero adopts and promotes the Plato-Polybius theory of cyclical change in institutions (Rep. 1.45): "This cycle and what might be called revolutions in changes and alternations of governments , astonishing (Mirique sunt orbes et quasicircuitus in rebus publicis commutationum et vicissitudinum)." Here and elsewhere Cicero uses "orbis" (meaning wheel, ring, circle, circle) to This concept of change is described as a cyclical occurrence.According to M． L．Clarke (cited in Harto 1949, 501), Cicero sees these changes as "natural but not inevitable"; that is, "a learned statesman can exert influence over them and prevent them ’” Cicero applied this notion of cyclical change both to past events and to the ongoing political changes of his day, saying: “Soon you will see the wheels turning ( Hic ille iam vertetur orbis)" (Rep2.45), or "the wheels of the political situation have turned (orbis hicin republic est conversus)" (Att. 2.9.1: cf. 2.21.2).In one of his later works [Dedivinattione ("Divination") 2.6], Cicero speaks of "what may be called a political revolution (quasdam conversiones rerum publicarum)." Here, Cicero The use of the noun "conversio," which means "to turn," has the effect of "rotating" in the sense of radical change, or even change by force, analogous to our "political revolution." " or "period" (such as the periodic changes in the four seasons); he also combines the word "conversio" with "mo-tus" (Sest. 99) or "perturbatio" (Phil. 11.27) use.In the preface to his book "On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres", Copernicus mentioned a proposition he found in Cicero "Cicetus postulates that the earth is in motion" (1978, 4).The reference material is Cicero's "Academic Philosophy" (Academica, prior. 2.123), where Cicero records a passage said by Theophrastus, Theophras According to Cicetus, the Earth "moves rapidly about its central axis," Storrs said, so that the sky appears to be in motion to an observer on Earth.Cicero's original words are "quae [terra] cumcircum axemse summa celeritate convertat et torqueat," where the verb "converters" (used as a reflexive verb) means to turn or revolve around an axis, and is thus analogous to the word cycle .

In later Latin, the noun "revolutio" had the meaning of "conversio" in classical Latin.Two examples may be cited from the fifth century A.D.: the "sidereae revolutionis excursus" by Martianus Capella (9.22), and the "sidereae revolutionis excursus" by Augustine in The City of God. (22.12) describes the reincarnation of the soul as many "cycles [per diversa corporarevolutio-nes] through different bodies." Medieval and Renaissance In the Middle Ages, the Middle Ages were not revolutions in the sense of a complete and dramatic destruction of the institutions of the socio-political ruling group, although sometimes uprisings and the forced resignation of a dynastic ruler caused some changes in the government testimony. The Peasants' Revolt in England in 1381 had many of the features of an early revolution, including "burning of estates, destruction of records pertaining to land tenure, hunting gardens, etc., assassination of landowners and lawyers, and [10(?) "There lawyers and officials were killed, their homes looted, and Savoy [the palace of John (of Gaunt)] burned" (Lange 1968, 290). However, from the present meaning of the word revolution Technically speaking, it was not yet a revolution, since it had no viable program, did not even intend to end the monarchy or abolish aristocratic rule, and even if it had a program, it was very limited in eliminating abnormal grievances or stopping atrocities. Some scholars (Rosenstock 1931, 95; Hartow 1949, 502) have said that the origin of the current usage of the word "revolution" can be traced back to the beginning of the Italian Renaissance, for example, in the 14th century by Matteo Villa In his Chronicle (4.89=Villani 1848, 5:390), he mentions "la subita revoluzione fatta per i cittadini di Siena" ("the cittadini di Siena caused by the citizens of Siena") in 1355 A hasty revolution"). Obviously, what is being said here is a man-made political event, and the occurrence of this event is not the result beyond human control. However, given that in another section (4.82=5: 384) Villani refers to the same event with the expression "lenovita fatte nella citta di Siena" (revolutions brought about in the city of Siena), and he also uses rivoluzione (9.34 = 6:223 ) and "revoluzioni" (5.19 = 5:413) to describe political upheavals in general, so, as Hatto warns us, we must be careful not to refer to this single Revolution takes too seriously.

Scholars have identified several other early examples of the use of the word "rivoluzione", although, in the prevailing usage at the time, the word was not used as a political term or concept.Machiavelli shows in his writings that he did indeed begin to explore the concept of what we call a political revolution, and he likes to use the Italian "mutazionedistato" for "commutatioreipublicae" or "mutatiorerum" which is customary in Latin, although On at least one occasion [in The Prince (ch. 26)] he wrote using "revoluzoni" in a more general sense of change (Harteau 1949, 503). By the beginning of the sixteenth century, the history of Florence The scholar Guicciardini (1970, 81) wrote a change in the government as a "rivouzione". It seems to be generally believed that the new meaning of revolution, which expresses political change, arose in Italy at the end of the Middle Ages and the beginning of the Renaissance. , then spread to the north. During the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, the word "revolution" originally had an astronomical meaning, so, perhaps associative or derived, the word also had astrological meanings.Dante in Italian and Latin, Giovane in English, El Phlegenas (who gave Dante chiefly information on astronomy) and Mesahara in Latin, and Sacro Biscoe, and others, used the term in a definite sense to record the observed daily motions of the stars, sun, moon, and planets, and also to record the orbits of the planets (or the spheres to which they were supposed to belong) Performance on sports.In the early days of the scientific revolution, the word was boldly used in the title of Copernicus's famous work "On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres" (1543), and occasionally in Galileo's 1632 "Dialogue Concerning the Two Great Systems of the World" middle.It can also be seen in some historical works; in Le Rechon's Mathematics for Fun (translated from English by William Outred), in many editions and in several foreign translations, in Vincent Winn's similarly accessible overview of astronomy and astrology, and Streeter's Carolina Astronomy (1661) (from which Newton recorded Kepler's first of the Three Laws), can be found in this term.In other words, from the twelfth century to the second century and beyond, the word revolution appears frequently and prominently in professional treatises (both in Latin and in the vernacular) on literature and astrology, and in The Divine Comedy. "In such non-professional works, it means that celestial bodies (or their balls) rotate 360 ​​degrees and complete ~ times of circular motion or this periodic (periodic) motion measured by a certain unit.But the meaning of "revolution" has also expanded, and it can refer to any rotation or situation that goes round and round-from the physical event such as the turning of a wheel, to the concept that symbolizes thinking about something over and over in the mind. By the time of the Renaissance, and then in the mid-17th century, "revolution" began to acquire a broader meaning than its original astronomical and astrological meaning, and its meaning went well beyond the enumerated range of mathematics and physics. Revolution can be any kind of periodic (or semi-periodic) change in something, and finally, it can be used to denote any phenomenon that goes through an orderly series of stages of development—a cycle (meaning "to go round") ) Even the rise and fall of civilized things or cultural undertakings, like the ebb and flow of the tide, is said to be a cycle.All these meanings are clearly related to the original astronomical meaning of the word. There is a similar word called "rotation", which is sometimes confused with "revolution".Today, we like to clearly distinguish between the motion of a body around its axis (rotation) and the circular motion of a body along a closed course or orbit (revolution); so we say that the Earth rotates around its axis on a diurnal basis , and carries out an annual revolution on its orbit around the sun.However, until the end of the century the two terms were often used interchangeably, for example, in Newton's Principia (1687). The word "Rotate" comes from the Latin verb "rotare" (meaning to rotate or turn); the Latin noun "rota" means a wheel (and thus later has the meaning of carriage), and can even express change in metaphor and impermanent meaning.In contemporary English idiom, the synonym "rota" has survived to denote a fixed order of work shifts or rotations, or even to denote a roster or list of persons.The late Latin noun "rotatio" gives us our word "rotation". During the Middle Ages and Renaissance, fortune-telling "tarocchi" (playing cards) were used like playing cards today, and one of the important cards was the "rotadifortuna" or wheel of fortune.A person's fate is supposed to be determined by this wheel of fortune or "rota" and its rotation.Thus, perhaps there are two main sources of "turning" which are believed to influence and even determine the course of life and the course of nations: one is the turning, spinning or galloping of the wheel of fortune, the other is the celestial sphere. around.Presumably, the occurrence of the word "revolution" could be associated with the wheel of fortune and thus with the celestial sphere (an idea already developed by Henry Gluck).It is possible to find evidence for this link in the frequency of "revolution" or "rivoluzione" in political contexts associated with the wheel of fortune or "rotadifortun".In Dante, "revoluzione" appears in the "Divine Comedy" as a word denoting the circular motion of heaven; but he does not need the imagination of "rotadifortuna".Although the rotation of the wheel is a circular motion, this does not mean that where the rotation of the wheel starts and ends, it will stop there.Therefore, although for the movement of the celestial sphere, it is of practical significance to turn around, return or complete a cycle, etc., it is not necessarily the case for the wheel of fortune. It is well documented that at the end of the Middle Ages and during the Renaissance there was a widespread belief that the affairs of government were controlled by the planets in motion.Eugene Rosenstock-Hughes (193, 86-87; cf. Harto 1949, 511) found a sixteenth-century German example in which events in human history The initial run "("indererstenRevolution") is related to the planets of the zodiac.Villani (Hato 1949, 510) has an account of 1362, in which astrology provides the exact time when the Florentines will send troops to attack Pisa.Both Kepler and Galileo used astrological charts to fortune-tell rulers as part of their professional work.Kepler (1937, 4:67, cf. Griwank 1973, 144) had argued that the appearance of the stars was associated with those protracted catastrophes "due not only to the death of the sovereign but to the ensuing [nicht ebendurch Abgang eines Potentatens und darauf erfolgende Neuerung im Regimen] "caused some misery.In a letter of 1606, Kepler (1937, 15:295-296) criticized astrology for its shallow foresight of human history "based on the workings of the universe [ex revolutione mundi]".There is some pictorial evidence that the royal power of Queen Elizabeth and Louis XIV and the basis of their monarchy are linked to astrology. People who lived during the Renaissance or in the 16th and 17th centuries immediately associate the word "revolution" with the idea of ​​a gigantic wheel of time unfolding.The concept of the wheel of time and its movement is not only used as a purely ideological metaphor, but it can also be illustrated with specific physical images and physical objects as examples.For example, on the bell tower of a Renaissance building, anyone can see the continuous operation of the hands (there is only one hand, which is the hour hand indicating the hour) marking the progress of time.Another visual metaphor for the passing of time is probably the daily apparent motion during the orbit of the planet including the sun, stars, and moon.For the wheel of time, a visual description can also be made according to the movement of the sun shuttling between fixed stars on its apparent orbit every year.The daily rotation of the celestial sphere (which we today call its rotation) brings about its change from morning to noon, evening to night, and marks a cycle of 24-hour days.During the course of a year, the changes brought about by the movement of the sun in its orbit include changes in the position of rising and sunset, changes in the length of day and night, and changes in seasons. The important nature of these periodic changes is not only that they are a cycle or repetition of a sequence of phenomena in the sense that the word "revolution" itself means "turning back," but that in the course of each such cycle of time , there are always some dramatic important changes.What difference is there like the difference between day and night, or between winter and summer? !The difference is like this: Life arises, reaches maturity, then dies, decays, and finally rises again—that is, the cycle of life on Earth and the endless continuation of life.The cycle of astronomical time consists of a series of changes so dramatic that they are properly defined by the word "mutaign," which was used by Montaigne and some other Renaissance writers to denote a certain great changes, and we call events resembling such changes revolutions.By the 17th century, a revolution referred to a series of events, a cycle or a rise and fall, or (more or less) a reappearance of a previous state in the tide of changing human affairs and the fate of nations, Things and particular events that occur sequentially and individually are often called mutations.However, even if a certain major event or change is not necessarily a part of a certain fixed order, because it occurred and formed in time with the development of the great historical wheel, it is still possible to use revolution to describe it . A revolution can also be used to refer to an event that alters the normal course of history, such as an event that speeds up the wheel of history a little, or an event that heralds a new era (or "epoca") and marks the beginning of a new era.In the 16th and 17th centuries, and even in the 18th century, great changes were called revolutions, reflecting changes to the enterprise of astrology, to the wheel of fortune, to the rise and fall or cycle of things, and to the advancement of the wheel of history. The context of thinking. Perhaps the most interesting aspect of this "revolution" is that it implies that some events are determined by factors beyond human will and power—perhaps by the astrology industry, perhaps by related (historical caused by the operation of the wheels) is determined by the law of cyclical succession.The course of human events and history, therefore, presumably follows the same irresistible and fixed program as the motions of the stars, sun, moon, and planets, which can be changed by the direct intervention of God, as in miracles. as happened.Perhaps, too, human intervention can bring about a revolution that transcends or replaces in an instant the fixed order determined by the movements of those stars. 17th century In addition to these usages and meanings, the concept of revolution, which expresses acyclical great change events, gradually emerged.In this development we must bear in mind that in the sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries the word "revolution" had two apparently opposing general meanings.A refers to a specific activity that goes through the whole process of a cycle, which can eventually lead to a state that is the same as or similar to a previous state, or leads to a continuation or a state of this kind of cycle. There is no need for a strictly cyclical rise and fall process.Another signification is subversion, overthrow, "mutatiorerum (change of things)", a change of considerable importance in state affairs, in the succession of a dynasty, or in a regime, etc.The first type relies on the concept of a complete cycle or a 360-degree turn; the second type relies on the concept of a 180-degree turn, which is nothing more than a radical turn in a short period of time. The revolution sounds a lot like our concept of revolution (that is, political revolution) after 1789.However, the difference between the two may not be as great as it seems.For at this time it was widely believed, as most of recorded history shows, that the way to progress was to go back to earlier, better times. Since ancient times, a major advance has been imagined as a return to some previous state, to some golden age.The belief that turning back a clock or a calendar constitutes progress is linked to the notion that the world itself, or the circumstances in which we live, is continually deteriorating, a decline that, according to Western religious thought, can be traced back to the When they fell and were expelled from the Garden of Eden.Who among us didn't have a parent who told him the "before" was better?Our parents were right.Food is obviously tastier and more nutritious when it is fresh than when it is frozen, adulterated with chemical dyes and preservatives, and packed in plastic bags that lack fresh air.Clearly, it is much more comfortable to sail across the ocean in the safety and tranquility of a private cabin under the care of a ship's stewardess than for eight or ten people in a row of cramped wide-body jets.There is no doubt that our parents were also right when it came to the fact that our children respected their elders more and behaved more politely when they were young.Today, none of us who live under the constant threat of chemical warfare, biological warfare, and nuclear annihilation look back without seeing some of the darkest days of the past as in some sense less important than our present. good times. In the same way the sociopolitical reformers of the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries looked forward to a return to some better or similar time, to a biblical environment, to the Sermon on the Mount A world governed by the principles of justice proclaimed inThus, from going back to some better time, building "a paradise," restoring—as proposed in the egalitarian Manifesto of 1649 (Elmore 1975, 153)—“[Existence Violent change is seen as a "revolution" in the sense of those principles of the "primitive Christian [spontaneous] commune".Up until the time of the American Revolution, the definitive meaning of the word "revolution" was to restore, in this case to restore the principles of the Bill of Rights (1689), which did not apply to the British in the British colonies in the United States . In the 16th, 17th, and even into the 18th centuries, try to say what a certain author had in mind by "revolution": a definite regression (a cyclical phenomenon, a rise and fall), or It is not always easy (sometimes even impossible) whether it is some mass event (that can lead to the establishment of something new) or some sequential event.For example, in Montaigne's "Essays" (p. 74) translated by John Florio in 1603, there is such a passage with modern meaning: "Looking at these internal and domestic struggles, who will not Shout out in amazement: This gigantic world frame is approaching destruction, Judgment Day is coming, stop thinking about the many, many worse revolutions you've seen...?" Taken in isolation, this passage seems like Is a commentary with meaning after 1789, Vernon F.Snow (1962, 169) explains it this way, but the presence of the modifier "many, many worse" implies that Florio is thinking of nothing more than previous recurring events, or even just some previous events; this interpretation is confirmed by the fact that Florio's "revolutions" refer to Montaigne's "Choses" (1595, "97" = 88; 19O6, 204), while Snow did not notice this.Montaigne, referring to the events we would call "revolutions," used "mutationdestat" (change of government), from the Latin "commutatio rei publiCae." In the other example that Snow mentioned (and in some of the translations he did not mention), there is no doubt that most of them have a circular meaning.In the 1614 edition of William Camden's Miscellaneous Treatise on Antiquities, there is a chapter on "dress", which is absent from the first edition of 1605.Towards the end of the chapter (p. 237), Camden says: "Accordingly, for those who loathe the small handbags in fashion today, let them remember the words of Tacitus. Everything in the world is It goes round and round, just like the four seasons of a year, so is people's way of life, which also has its periodicity." Obviously, this passage contains similar content in another passage that Tacitus said in a similar situation, Of course, there is no word "revolution" in this passage of Tacitus [Annals (chronology) 3.55.5]: "Nisi fort rebus cunctis inest quidam velut ortis, ut quem ad modum temporum vices, its morum vertantur". In the famous "graveyard" scene in Hamlet (5.1.98), there is a striking example of "revolution" as a cycle in relation to human affairs and life.Hamlet in Shakespeare's works said to the skeleton dug up by the clown: "From this change, we can see through the impermanence of life. Could it be that these dead bones have received so much education during their lifetime, but they have to be thrown away as blocks of wood after death?" Play? It's a strange thought." Did Shakespeare [as Snow (1962, 168) pointed out] equate "revolution" with the restoration of one's former state, or with the return to a previous life-death cycle process? somewhere in the "?That is, is there a sense of ebb and flow, or what some authors refer to as a "reversal of fortune"?This intention is contained in Molière's "Cruel Fate that confronts us with all great changes" (Psyche, lines 611-612). In the first half of the 17th century, when the word "revolution" was used in a general or non-scientific sense, it tended to refer to a cyclic or semi-cyclic phenomenon similar to some astronomical sense.因此，在1611年的一部词典中，"revolution"只被定义为"旋转一周，环行，回到最初的位置或出发点；循环过程的完成。"不过，"revolution"渐渐有了表示某一重大的事件和变化的含义。以下这段话摘自詹姆斯·豪厄尔1646年所写的一封信，从中我们或许可以了解到"revolution"一词的这两种含义是怎样同时出现的："我想，后来万能的上帝与全人类产生了不和……因为在这12年的时间里，不仅在欧洲，而且在世界各地都出现了一些最奇怪的变化（revolution）和最可怕的事件，我敢冒昧地说，在亚当死后，它们就已经在如此短暂的一段时间周期（revolution）内落到了人类的身上。"在"如此短暂的一段时间周期内"这个短语中，豪厄尔（1890，I：512）是按照传统的含义和词的本义来使用revolution这个词的；但是在"最奇怪的变化"这个短语中，他也许想到了、也许没有想到那些动荡的岁月中的政治事件。 16世纪没有经历过我们今天使用这个词所表示的任何重大的或大范围的社会领域和政治领域中的革命。因此，在16世纪或17世纪初，也就没有什么政治事件或社会事件可用来作为革命理论的具体事例，或者，可为人类具有创造性的工作范围中的（激烈的甚至是突发的长期变化意义上的）革命提供事例或概念模型。不过，到了17世纪中叶，政治变动使得革命理论和革命概念有了实际发展的迹象，在这些变化中，有著名的1688年的光荣革命——第一个被承认的现代革命（关于宗教改革运动请参见本章补充材料4．l）。 在今天，人们对17世纪中叶的光荣革命（参见下文）出现前几十年的一系列事件的讨论，使得光荣革命的意义不怎么明显了；对于这些事件，人们今天有时候把它们统称为英国革命——在史学家中，这一普遍的用法由来已久，而其中的许多史学家并不认为这些事件就是一场革命。有的史学家，例如阿克顿勋爵（1906，219），把后来出现的光荣革命归属于英国革命，这种情况造成了更多的混乱。对这一所谓的英国革命，几乎从未有人给它下过定义，甚至那些认为有过这样一场革命的人也未定义过。这场所谓的革命的主要特点是，不时地被戏剧性事件打断的一些政体方面和宗教方面的大动荡：内战（1642-1646），查理一世皇帝受审并被处决（1649），联邦的空位期和奥利弗·克伦威尔控制下的摄政政体。19世纪著名的立宪史专家塞缪尔·罗森·伽德纳把历史的这一幕看作是"1625－1660年的清教徒革命，"并且，他编纂的那部历史资料巨著（1906）就是以此为题的；但在其中（例如，pp．X，xi）他也提到过"英国革命。"尽管这场英国革命以暴力活动（内战，弑君）为特征，而且在政体的外在形式（联邦制而非君主制）方面导致了暂时的变化，但是，并没有出现"具有永恒价值的"根本性的政治变革或社会变革。甚至基本的王权神授问题和（建立在选民基础上拥有真正至高无上权威的）议会的权力问题，在光荣革命之前一直没有得到充分的解决。 伽德纳（在1886年以及其它的著作中）提出的清教徒革命这一专有名词，是以这一显而易见的事实为依据的，即与国王作对的主要是清教徒，但他们对立的问题是些经济和政治方面的问题（反对皇室运动的参与者包括许多新兴的商人阶级和工匠阶级的人士，他们要求在政府中能发挥更大的作用，并促使政府减少在财政和贸易方面所加的限制）。在清教徒运动中，有一些真正的革命党人，其中最极端的派别就是那些所谓的平均主义者（对他们的这一称呼具有贬义，因为他们笃信民主和平等）。平均主义者曾两度败在克伦威尔手下，而"他们所希望的革命一直没有发生（艾尔莫1975，9）。他们想废除垄断和特权（但不废除私有财产权），他们要确立的是普遍的"男人作主的家庭选举权"，但不是"无条件限制的男人的选举权"（p．50）。他们的目的是要通过激进的议会改革，地方行政官员和其他官员的选举，政府部门的更迭，政府的分权和其权力的严格限制，以及君主政体和贵族院的废除等一系列步骤，使政府的模式发生革命。 当今最重要的论述英国革命的作者克里斯托弗·希尔在《革命的世纪》（1972，ch．11，pp．165ff．）中断言：在"1640－1660的20年中…… 许多方面都可以与1789年的法国大革命相比拟的""一场大的革命发生了。 "它之所以是一场"大革命"，是因为"法国式的君主专制制度一去不复返了。 ""专制政府的工具，星法院和高等宗教事物委员会，被永远地废除了"，而"议会对税收的控制则被认可了。 "不过，希尔又指出，这"是一次很不完整的革命，""在1640年到1660年期间，曾经有过两次革命，其中只有一次成功了。 "希尔还坚持认为，曾经有过一场"伟大的人类思想中的革命"——一项"具有普遍意义的成就……即政治问题也许可以通过讨论和辩论来解决，""实惠和权宜之计比神学和历史更为重要，"而且，"无论是文物研究还是在《圣经》中寻章索句，都不是导致国家的和平、秩序及繁荣的最佳途径。 "由此看来，我们应当同意希尔的这一观点，即它构成了"一场如此伟大的思想革命，以致于我们难以想象在此之前人的思想活动是怎样进行的。 "在这本书中，希尔总结了一下自1640到1660这20年的影响，他把"受挫失败的""清教徒革命"与"无法毁灭的思想中的革命"进行了对比。后者包括王政复辟后组成皇家学会的那些人导致的科学革命和"这一皇家学会要为之献身的散文革命。 " 19世纪以前，人们一般不把这场所谓的英国革命称之为革命；在其出现的世纪中，人们把它称作"大叛乱"和"内战"。19世纪的史学家和政治家弗朗索瓦·基佐撰写了一部十分有影响的六卷本的《英国革命史（1826-1856）》，在这部著作中，他把法国大革命和英国革命（二者都以弑君为特征）进行了对比，并且对英国相对温和的革命学说大加赞赏。这部书特别令卡尔·马克思怒火中烧，他在1850年一篇重要的文章中对基佐进行了抨击。马克思和恩格斯在许多著作中讨论了英国革命（当然也讨论了光荣革命）。到了20世纪，许多有关英国史的著作都把英国（清教徒）革命和光荣革命一并提及。 光荣革命 尽管17和18世纪许多历史和政治书籍的著者把英国革命称之为一场革命，但在当时，它并没有被普遍认为是渐渐形成的政治革命概念的具体体现，我们这里所要追溯的正是这种概念的历史。确切地讲，思想主流中的第一次现代的革命是光荣革命，这也许是因为，它所导致的变化是持久性的。18世纪中叶，在《法国百科全书》关于革命的条目中，光荣革命被列为典型，而英国革命甚至没有被提及。在第一版的《不列颠百科全书》（1771，3：550）中，据说"政治中的"革命被定义为"政府中的重大变化或转变。"有人说从这种意义上讲，革命这个词被"显著地"用来表示"1688年英国的重大事件，这一年，詹姆斯二世国王放弃了王位，奥兰治亲王和王妃被宣布为英格兰的国王和女王。"40年以后，在出版第四版时（1810，17：789），《不列颠百科全书》列举了四种含义的政治革命："所谓英国发生的革命"（光荣革命，1688），"美国独立战争"，"18世纪末左右波兰发生的革命"（这场革命使波兰被奥地利、普鲁士和俄国瓜分了），以及"法国大革命"——"无论从伴随它所发生的事件或由它产生的结果来看，它是所有革命中非凡无比的革命。" 光荣革命由两大事件和导致它们的两个阶段组成：詹姆斯二世的逊位，威廉和玛丽的即位。与后来历史上的大部分革命不同，尽管这场革命也伴随有大规模炫耀武力的情况，但相对来说它是和平的和不流血的。革命使君主国的天主教路线改为新教路线，并且使王位继承人永远是新教徒有了保证。不过，十分有意义的重要之举是，证明了国王的权力并非绝对是神授之权，它需经过被统治者，至少是议会所代表的被统治者的同意和认可。据说，当王位因詹姆斯已经——据宣布如此——"放弃了"统治权而出现"空缺"时就发生了这种情况；"并没有宣布他已经被废黜，或已经forfaulted亦即丧失了王权"（乔治·M．特里维廉1939，145）；"空缺这个词从理论中已经打破了神圣的世袭权，"而往位继承法把王位共同授予威廉和玛丽，则从实践上打破了这种权力。在1689年的一年里，英国人的一些权利和特权在构成《民权宣言》的一系列"条款"中得到了详细的说明，这一文件提出了一些威廉和玛丽要当国王和女王必须接受的条件。除非他们承认已公布的对皇权的限制，否则他们就不能登上君主的宝座。在威廉和玛丽同时接受王权和《民权宣言》时，他们在形式上同意了一项契约，该契约无需进行根本性改动已有三个世纪了。英格兰已经"有了一部宪法草案"，它已经在发挥作用并且已经奏效了。但是我们必须注意到，《民权宣言》"并没有引入任何新的法律原则，甚至没有提及对不信奉国教者的不容和法官的终身制等问题，尽管大家完全同意，立即进行这两方面的改革是非常必要的"（特里维廉1939，150）。 今天，光荣革命所具有的革命性看起来也许是微乎其微的，尤其与法国大革命和俄国革命相比，更是如此。但在随后的18世纪中，像保守的大卫·休谟和约瑟夫·普里斯特利这些具有不同政治观点的人一致承认，君主的统治者要得到被统治者的同意和认可这一原则很有意义。在普里斯特利看来（1826，286-287）： 我们历史上最重要的时期，就是威廉国王统治下的革命时期。正是在那时，在经历了多次动荡、经历了政权机构的不同成员为争夺权力所进行的频繁的争斗（参与者中有些人付出了很大的血的代价）之后，我们的宪法终于确立了下来。像这样非凡并且取得了如此可喜成就的革命，直到近年来美国和法国发生了更加非凡的革命之前，恐怕在世界历史上都可谓是独一无二的。正像休谟先生所说的那样，这场革命割除了一些以世袭权为依据对权力的要求；当一位王子被选中时，他要在一些明文规定下才能获得王位，并且把他的权威建立在与人民权利相等的基础上。 对大多数英国人来讲，这是一场慈善的革命。毫无疑问，光荣革命因此有助于在思想上把革命与进步观点连在一起。 在光荣革命中，进步与保守形成了鲜明的对比，在题为《英国革命》的一篇文章中，阿克顿勋爵（1906）用一种戏剧性的方式描述了这两个方面。阿克顿在文中介绍了伯克和J． B．麦克莱的观点，他说，麦克莱"煞费苦心地指出，1688年的革命不是革命的而是保守的，它远远不如对近代错误的纠正，而且又回到了古代原则那里。"这场革命"基本上是君主政体方面的，""统治阶级没有发生什么变化，"也就是说，"没有出现社会的贵族势力向民主势力的力量的转换。"无论是非常议会中还是随后的《权利法案》中都没有提到"自由政府，宗教自由，国民教育，解放奴隶，贸易自由，救济贫困，出版自由，政府团结，辩论公开等。"尽管如此，阿克顿依然认为，这场革命是"英国这个国家有史以来所做的最伟大的事情。"因为"它在契约基础上建立起了国家政权，并且订立了这样一条原则，即违背契约就会丧失王权。"既然是"议会授予王权，并且是在一定的条件下授予王权，"议会"在行政方面和立法方面就成了最高的机构"："这一切并不是恢复原状，而是转化"（P．231）。 在把革命的两大部分——具有重要意义的政府形式的改进和恢复更为古老的原则或状态——连在一起时，光荣革命使本意为循环的"revolution"这个词的用法有了发展，即它可用来表示变化所具有的非凡性。最终，随着这个世纪的消逝，revolution结果成了这样一个词：它主要是指某种全新的事物的输入，就像美国的独立战争和法国大革命那样，而且不再指重新肯定或复辟了。 光荣革命所带有的恢复旧状的色彩，在第16版的《不列颠百科全书》（1823，17：789）的关于政治革命的综合条目中阐述得很清楚。文中说，这场革命不仅规定（重新规定）继承人应为新教徒，而且宪法要"恢复其原有的纯洁性。"此外，这一"重要事件""巩固了"——而不是规定或首次提出了——"不列颠人的权利和自由。"这类似于克拉伦登（d．1674）在其所著的《英国叛乱和内战史》（bk，11，&207）中对"revolution"这个词的使用。克拉伦登把1660年复辟后的那段局面，描述成这样一种情况："王室中许多受排斥的成员良心泯灭，义愤皆无，他们忍气吞声，许多年没有对王室采取更进一步的步骤，一直到革命时为止。" 在托马斯·霍布斯有关长期国会的历史的著作中（1969，204）可以看到，作者的论述很有说服力，在他的笔下，恢复或循环几乎有着相同的政治含义："我发现，在这场革命过程中，最高权力在循环运动，这一循环是在一父一子两个篡位者之间进行的，从已故的国王开始"到他的儿子为止。最高权力的循环"从查理一世国王到长期国会；又从长期国会到残余议会；再从残余议会到奥利弗·克伦威尔；然后又从理查德·克伦威尔（即奥利弗·克伦威尔的长子）回到残余国会；随后由此到长期国会；再从长期国会到查理二世国王，循环在这里有可能滞留很长时间。"克拉伦登伯爵在1660年9月13日《论军队的遣散》的讲演中，曾求助于另一种循环，即行星的周期性运行："占星学家进行了似是而非的辩解（但愿它是真的），即过去20年间的所有这些运动[！]已经成了非自然的运动，而且它们都是由一颗邪恶的星星的罪恶影响引起的；尽管存在那些邪恶的星星的影响，但对我们没有多大的妨碍。上述占星学家向我们保证，星星的邪恶被排除了；天国仁慈的守护神逐渐占了上风，并且制服了邪恶势力，而我们原来那些仁慈的星星们又重新统治我们了"（《国政短论集》，1692，3）。 我不知道，人们首次把历用年的革命称之为"光荣的"是什么时候，不过我知道，在当年，约翰·伊夫林在写给塞缪尔·佩皮斯的信中问道，究竟怎样"我也能在这场惊人的革命中为您效劳呢？"在第二年，一本教科书中提及了"这场伟大的革命。"早在1695年，人们就用"revolutioneer"（"与革命有关的人"）这个词来指支持1688年诉诸革命解决问题的那些人。据说《国政短论集》（1692）中1660－1669的那卷曾打算"说明后来的那场革命的必要性和明确的合理性。"18世纪初的几十年中，也曾有过许多关于1688年革命的论述；在塞缪尔·约翰逊博士的《英语词典》中，"revolution"的第三个定义为："政府或国家状况的变动。我们用它来……表示在承认威廉国王和玛丽女王后所产生的变动。" 在法国，支持保守的天主教观点的人并不认为诉诸革命是件有益的或光荣的事。人们所看到的只是一种循环，以及被处死刑的查理一世和仓皇溃逃的詹姆斯二世之间的一种相似，他们二者都曾是信奉天主教的君主，并且都失去了各自的王位，他们都被新教徒取代了：一个被克伦威尔取代，另一个被奥兰治的威廉取代。有人担心，在法国也会出现类似的革命循环，这种担心是很自然的。法国耶稣会会上皮埃尔·约瑟夫·奥尔良公爵所著的《英格兰革命史》的一个主题就是，在这些事件中并不存在什么不可抗拒性。诚如他将此书（1711年译成英文，1722年又印行了第二版）题献给路易十四时所说的那样，"过去之事（美国革命）……未能制止，并非陛下之过。"若路易之"忠告得以采纳，"且其"继承人也接受这些忠告，则英格兰国王仍会雄居在他的宝座之上。" 然而，法国的新教徒们在1688年的革命中看到了新的希望。在那一年的年底，皮埃尔·朱利奥在《牧人寄给巴比伦监狱中呻吟的忠于法国的人们的信》中，表述了他这位新教徒的希望：这场"伟大而惊人的革命无疑将导致其他一些革命，这些革命毫不逊色于"（引自古利姆特1975）威廉和玛丽通过革命继承王位。朱利奥发现了希望，"无需流血、刀光剑影和火焰，反基督教者（即路易十四）的暴政就会垮台。"1691年，在讨论查理一世被处决和克伦威尔的飞黄腾达时，天主教徒雷冈纳特产生了这样一种想象，"那些无所事事的和不安分的灵魂讨厌过持续安定的生活，他们喜欢革命；简而言之，所有那些希望在变革或普遍的动乱中获利的人，都加入了这个阴谋集团，并且不遗余力地促使其成功。" 概念的扩展 让一玛丽·古利姆特在他的《语词、革命和历史》（1975）中曾经指出，在17世纪最后的10年中，法国人在谈到1688年的英国革命时，相当广泛地使用"revolution"这个词和这个概念，当然，他们谈及这场革命时并不是把它当作什么"光荣的"事情，而是当作新教徒对已经建立起来的君主制的一种威胁。古利姆特特别探讨了17世纪末18世纪初文学作品（悲剧和浪漫作品）中的革命思想以及史学著作中的革命思想。他所发现的丰富的事例表明，"revolution"这个词和这个概念正在民间逐步流行起来，这些例子有助于解释人们为什么在这些年间接受了数学和科学中发生过革命这一看法。遗憾的是，这部杰出的著作虽然在很大程度上发展了作者有关17世纪的革命观念的主题，但由于受到20世纪50年代、60年代和70年代的各种政治事件强有力的和公认的影响，它却没有坚定不移和始终清晰地区分17世纪的观点和作者本人的解释。在涉及到"revolution"这个词的实际出现时，尤其是这样，（正如20世纪的思想家们所看到的那样）作者的观点不同于他所分析的那些著作中的某种关于revolution的观念。即使在所举出的例子中，也并非总是要进行真正切实的尝试，以便揭示出"revolution"实际出现时究竟是指一种循环现象，还是指某一件独特的具有相当意义的事件。 然而，那些说明"革命"确实发生的例子的数目，为这个含有剧烈变革意思的词和概念的逐渐流行，提供了令人信服的证据。费奈隆的《特雷马克的奇遇》（1699年4月出版）就是一例；在1719年以及后来出版的注释本中，该书"涉及了许多富有传奇色彩的事件，其中包括查理一世的死，查理二世的复辟，克伦威尔的独裁，以及詹姆斯二世的倒台等"（参见古利姆特1975）。费来隆在好几章中讨论了"造反"和"造反的原因"（尤其是"政府中的那些达官显贵们的野心和不满"）。有三场"虚构的革命"，每一场都是在其王子已成了暴君的君主政体中发生的；在其中的两场革命中，暴君被杀死了，在另一场革命中，暴君被流放了。正如古利姆特注意到的那样，其中有两场革命中出现了暴动（"revolte"），人民揭竿而起，以便获取他们的自由，但他们未能摆脱君主制、建立共和制。他们根据继承的合法性思想或有倾向的投票，选择了新的国王；所以有人说，这种"革命根本没有创造出一种新的秩序，甚至没有对现行的君主模式进行根本性的改革，而是恢复了一种专治政治已经致使其堕落的旧的政治秩序。"费奈隆说，"只有突然出现的暴力革命才能使这个行将倒台的政权回到其合乎自然的正常轨道上"(引自古利姆特1975）。1697年，在一部题为《绅士考特尼——英国伊丽莎白初恋密史》的小说中，勒·诺布耳描述了英王詹姆斯二世的一位拥护者对英国革命的看法，他写道："英格兰是一个没有间歇的、革命的大剧场，转瞬之间一片宁静就会变成最猛烈的狂风暴雨，而狂风暴雨又会立即变为一片宁静。"17世纪末许多法国小说中都充满了革命的精神，这些小说竟然是些"（涉及历史和风流韵事的著作）"。勒·诺布耳在《阿布拉·缪勒——马赫麦特五世退位的历史》中讲了一个故事，叙述了"1687年11月奥特曼帝国发生的革命，苏丹马赫麦特被废黜，他的兄弟索里曼被推上了王位。" 原为天文学概念的"revolution"转而被用在了有关政治事物甚至生活状况的领域之中，这种新的用法，在17世纪弗朗索瓦·波米编著的一部法语-拉丁语词典中得到了说明。他的《皇家词典》（3rded，1691）有两个各自独立的关于"revolution"的词条，第一个词条的含义是技术意义上的，指传统的循环运动和天体的运行："tour，coursdes As tres.天体的运行、公转、旋转、运动周期（Astrorum Circurmactus，circuitus，circuitio，conversio）"。关于"revolution"的第二个词条专用于政治变革方面，指一般性变化；甚至还被用来指时间的推移和命运的变迁："changementdetat．国事的变化、变革、变动。世态炎凉，命途多舛（Pubicaereicommutatio，conversio，mutatio．Temporumvarietas，fortunaeque vicissitudo）"。 在约翰·欧文顿的《苏格拉特之行1689》（1696）一书中，可以看到revolution这个词新的含义的扩展。在书的四个附录中，第一个是"戈尔康达王国近年来革命的历史。"所讨论的革命看来已经使政府发生了变化，一个傀儡国王从他的政府那里夺回了权力，没有诉诸武力就成了一个真正的君主。在引言中，欧文顿描述了他从格雷夫森德启航的过程，那是"1689年4月11日，威廉国王陛下和玛丽女王陛下加冕的纪念日。"他说，船被派往东印度群岛，"船作为信使去传播这场非凡的革命的喜讯：通过这场革命，二位尊贵的陛下荣登宝座，全国上下普天同庆。"欧文顿谈到"查-埃格伯反对他父亲的造反"时（newed，1929，pp．1O8－109），也使用了"revolution"这个词，以暗示一种复辟。他"日复一日地盼望着出现一场如意的革命，"欧文顿说，"那时他就有可能重返印度，他所希望的是父亲的去世会把他召回故里。" 在革命的新时代，早期的一部关于英国革命的著作很有新的现实意义。安东尼·阿沙姆的《政府的混乱和革命》（1649；参见扎戈林1954，Ch．5）是在其1648年出版的著作的基础上扩充而成的。他是在一般意义上而非特殊意义上使用"混乱和革命"这个词组的，在光荣革命之后他的这部著作之所以看起来很重要，是因为他从政治上对合法的和不合法的君主制政权进行了探讨。 再介绍一F托马斯·霍布斯和约翰·洛克对"revolution"的用法，我们的讨论大概可以就此为止了。霍布斯完全熟悉"revolution"这个词传统上的科学含义，他在关于几何学和自然哲学的著作中，也就是在这种含义上使用这个词的。他在著述中曾谈到过"逆运转"，"本轮"，以及意指完整循环运动的公转。在其对"英格兰内战的研究"或Behemoth（pt．4，conl．）中，霍布斯把这个科学术语转用到政治方面，他（正像我们看到的那样）写道："这场革命"就是"最高权力在循环运动，循环是在一父一子两个篡权者之间进行的，从已故的国王开始，到他的儿子为止。" 不过，当霍布斯着手"描述一场突然的政治变革"（斯诺1962，169）时，他——像培根、柯克、格雷维尔和塞尔登一样——"使用了造反、叛乱、颠覆等词。"洛克在《自然法则论文集》和《人类理解论》这两部著作中都使用了"revolution"这个词，用来指地球围绕太阳的周年运动（她的"每年一周的公转"），并且把太阳说成是行星"公转"的中心（斯诺1962，172；拉斯莱特1965，55）。在政治领域中，洛克曾对弗朗索瓦·贝尼埃《最近一次国家革命的历史》进行过认真而细致的研究，他仿效贝尼埃用"革命"这个术语来指已经完成的改朝换代。他的著名的《政府论（下篇）》，因其为光荣革命辩论和对以契约为基础的政府理论的介绍而享誉天下，"revolution"这个词他在书中只使用了两次（bk．2，&&223，225），每次都是用来指一种政治上的循环，通过循环，恢复某种以前的涉及宪法问题的状态，因此他提到了"人民迟迟不肯放弃他们的旧的制度的倾向，"这种倾向"在我国发生的许多次革命中，在现代和过去的时代，仍然使我们保留由国王、上议院和下议院组成的我们的旧的立法机关，或者经过几番毫无结果的尝试后仍然使我们重新采用这一制度"