What do you think?
Rate this book
History's Locomotives: Revolutions and the Making of the Modern World
This masterful comparative history traces the West’s revolutionary tradition and its culmination in the Communist revolutions of the twentieth century. Unique in breadth and scope, History’s Locomotives offers a new interpretation of the origins and history of socialism as well as the meanings of the Russian Revolution, the rise of the Soviet regime, and the ultimate collapse of the Soviet Union.
History’s Locomotives is the masterwork of an esteemed historian in whom a fine sense of historical particularity never interfered with the ability to see the large picture.
Martin Malia explores religious conflicts in fifteenth- and sixteenth-century Europe, the revolutions in England, American, and France, and the twentieth-century Russian explosions into revolution. He concludes that twentieth-century revolutions have deep roots in European history and that revolutionary thought and action underwent a process of radicalization from one great revolution to the next. Malia offers an original view of the phenomenon of revolution and a fascinating assessment of its power as a driving force in history.
History’s Locomotives is the masterwork of an esteemed historian in whom a fine sense of historical particularity never interfered with the ability to see the large picture.
Martin Malia explores religious conflicts in fifteenth- and sixteenth-century Europe, the revolutions in England, American, and France, and the twentieth-century Russian explosions into revolution. He concludes that twentieth-century revolutions have deep roots in European history and that revolutionary thought and action underwent a process of radicalization from one great revolution to the next. Malia offers an original view of the phenomenon of revolution and a fascinating assessment of its power as a driving force in history.
- GenresHistoryNonfiction
384 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2006
11 people are currently reading
124 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
September 8, 2012
History’s Locomotive, written by the late Martin Malia and published posthumously, is first and foremost an attempt to examine not only the origins of revolutions throughout European History but to use their examples to explain the origins of the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917. While Malia draws from a long period of time (1415 to 1917) for the examples used in his book, he does not directly connect them to the Bolshevik Revolution. Instead he focuses on elements of the given revolutions and alludes to those events building over time, eventually leading to the Bolshevik Revolution.
These elements make up Malia’s claim for the origin of revolutions in the European world. The first being a struggle with the “Old Regime”, by which Malia means the lesser sorts struggling against the lords or those in charge. The second part is that these struggles occur because there is a break in an agreement between these two groups. Wheatear it is a written contract like the Magna Carta or an unwritten agreement like feudalist agreements between lesser and greater lords. Lastly Malia follows these Unwritten or written contracts that were created before the revolutions and follow them are they evolve by grow stronger and effect larger and larger segments of the population.
By doing this Malia focuses on groups in the particular time periods that were considered fringe groups. While important in other developments, he seems to bring them up within the context of other chapters instead of giving them their own chapter. This however leads to his belief of how revolutions are carried out first with moderate sustainable revolution, followed by a radical turn and ending with a Thermidor reaction. While Malia does lay all of the revolutions out according to this blue print the degree to which they follow his layout seems questionable.
The first set of revolutions that Malia focuses on are the religious revolutions and revolts of the 15th and 16th century including Bohemian Hussites, German Lutherans, Huguenot France and Calvinist Netherlands. Malia tried to lay the revolutions out according to his blue print but by doing so may have marginalized the bulk of the people in the revolutions to focuses on smaller more radical groups in the revolutions. While some revolutions seemed to fit into Malia’s layout, others like the Hussite revolution seemed like they were forced into his mold. While it started like Malia said with friction between the educated people of Prague (lesser sort) and the Catholic clergy of the area (old regime), and the contract was the Eucharist describe in the bible which the Czech people were not reviving the “Chalice”. But with the death of Jan Hus before the revolution was in full the leader ship of the revolution was passed on to a more radical Jan Zizka.
With his leadership there was a division between the less radical Hussites and the new radical Taborites. With this development the Tabors started forming communes and making demands of the clergy beyond what Hus had original wanted. Ultimately put down by the moderates teamed up with the Catholics. In the end the moderates got what they wanted both the bread and wine in the Eucharist for the Czechs. While together this covers Malia’s three step layout, but these are two different groups. While the Hussites still held major cities like Prague the Tabors were in the country. The Hussites also did not break with the church unlike the Tabors. Ultimately these two groups should have been looked at separately not as the same despite their common origin.
Malia’s analysis of the Lutheran revolution also follows a similar path. While Luther does to a degree follow this end he does not have a Thermidor reaction with his group, the splinter group formed by Muntzer, which coincidently formed a commune, did. The French Huguenot Revolution did fit Malia’s lay out very well as did the Netherlands Revolution although they were more political than the previous two revolutions.
Malia’s next set of chapters focuses on the political revolutions of England in the 17th century and America and France in the 18th century. While the first part of the English chapter starts with the English Civil War. While the first part of the chapter follows Malia’s lay out the next part of it, The Restoration, seems to be outside of his model. While it is a Thermidor reaction it is after another Thermidor reaction with Cromwell assuming control of the Commonwealth.
It also seems that Malia does not give credit to Charles II in that Malia claims that he was restored to full monarchical control and the political clock was turned back. This Malia claims is what lead to the down fall of James II and the Glorious Revolution. Malia does not bring up that while Charles II as Monarch had many of the same powers that his father had he was much more cautious to use them because of what had happened to his father, while James II was oblivious and quite frankly an Idiot. This chapter does follow the layout of what Malia claims is a revolution, though it would have made more scene to split this chapter up to focus on the two separate revolution that occurred.
The next is the American Revolution, which does not follow Malia’s layout simply because it lacks a Thermidor reaction. This is undoubtedly because of the origins of the revolution which Malia explains quite well as the colonists viewing themselves equal to British citizens so they desired the same rights such as taxation with representation.
The next chapter deals with the French Revolution which Malia’s model fits like a glove. This is of course because he created the layout based after the French Revolution. Despite this he sums up the revolution quite well, if not a little long winded at points. All of the previous chapters also feel as though they have been building to this point with Malia delving into obscure communes and proto-socialist groups that emerged in the previous chapters to final come to a head in this chapter seemed to be Malia’s plan from the starts. However the inevitable collapse of the French revolution puts these ideas on hold until the next revolution comes to dust them off again.
The final section of Malia’s book deals with the 19th century and the build up to the Bolshevik Revolution, with the first chapter dealing with the revolts and revolutions of 1848. This chapter follows a different layout from the other chapters by following several different revolution, Malia also points out differences in those involved in this revolution. While the French Revolution was carried out by the educated elite of the third estate, this revolution was carried out by the regular people. Malia also looks at the German “revolution” created and controlled by Bismarck. This revolution however does not fit into his blue print of revolutions since it was in a scene hijacked from the intellectuals by Bismarck and turned into a conservative revolution of sort. The last half of the 19th century was next but this chapter seemed to add little to the book. It would seem that the main point of this chapter is to focuses on the creation and realization of Marxism as being the way to bring about true social revolution.
The final chapter deals with the long coming Bolshevik revolution. The final culmination of all of the revolutions and ideas that have been building from the Hussite revolution comes to a head with Lenin taking power. Malia, however, claims that this revolution both follows and does not follow his layout. With the implementation of the New Economic Policy (NEP) Lenin is committing a Thermidor reaction to his original ideals of a communist society by allowing some semblance of market. While Malia claims that the revolution does not follow his layout by being in a constant state of internal revolution. With this it seem that Malia, despite his constant building towards this moment, is not able to define it in the terms he laid out.
Malia’s book comes short of being able to define revolutions based on his layout. Even though he attempts to show every revolution as having those 3 separate stages, by doing so he lumped fringe groups in to make his point. I am also not convinced that the inclusion of the religious revolutions was necessary to proving his point. Lastly his incessant inclusion of any part of the revolution that created communes of proto-socialist society seemed like he was trying to force these revolutions to be something they were not.
This is not to say this is a bad book, quite the contrary. I enjoyed his theory that these revolutions were created but breaches of contract between the various parties’s involved in each revolution. Malia brilliantly defended this theory. Another subject came up in Malia’s book that I wish he addressed more, equality. Chapters such as his about the Hussites brought this up. The Hussites wanted to have the people be more equal with the priests in that they wanted full communion as well and though that the churches should own less land. Chapter after chapter the idea that these groups are trying to create equality hold true, while for the most part the equality they create is for a limited number of people. In Malia’s epilogue he even goes so far as to claim that future social revolutions are not likely to occur but where there is inequality one cannot be sure what will happen. In the end Malia’s book comes up a little short of its goal but it still provides an excellent base for future historical works, which should be read by anyone interested in revolutions in Europe
These elements make up Malia’s claim for the origin of revolutions in the European world. The first being a struggle with the “Old Regime”, by which Malia means the lesser sorts struggling against the lords or those in charge. The second part is that these struggles occur because there is a break in an agreement between these two groups. Wheatear it is a written contract like the Magna Carta or an unwritten agreement like feudalist agreements between lesser and greater lords. Lastly Malia follows these Unwritten or written contracts that were created before the revolutions and follow them are they evolve by grow stronger and effect larger and larger segments of the population.
By doing this Malia focuses on groups in the particular time periods that were considered fringe groups. While important in other developments, he seems to bring them up within the context of other chapters instead of giving them their own chapter. This however leads to his belief of how revolutions are carried out first with moderate sustainable revolution, followed by a radical turn and ending with a Thermidor reaction. While Malia does lay all of the revolutions out according to this blue print the degree to which they follow his layout seems questionable.
The first set of revolutions that Malia focuses on are the religious revolutions and revolts of the 15th and 16th century including Bohemian Hussites, German Lutherans, Huguenot France and Calvinist Netherlands. Malia tried to lay the revolutions out according to his blue print but by doing so may have marginalized the bulk of the people in the revolutions to focuses on smaller more radical groups in the revolutions. While some revolutions seemed to fit into Malia’s layout, others like the Hussite revolution seemed like they were forced into his mold. While it started like Malia said with friction between the educated people of Prague (lesser sort) and the Catholic clergy of the area (old regime), and the contract was the Eucharist describe in the bible which the Czech people were not reviving the “Chalice”. But with the death of Jan Hus before the revolution was in full the leader ship of the revolution was passed on to a more radical Jan Zizka.
With his leadership there was a division between the less radical Hussites and the new radical Taborites. With this development the Tabors started forming communes and making demands of the clergy beyond what Hus had original wanted. Ultimately put down by the moderates teamed up with the Catholics. In the end the moderates got what they wanted both the bread and wine in the Eucharist for the Czechs. While together this covers Malia’s three step layout, but these are two different groups. While the Hussites still held major cities like Prague the Tabors were in the country. The Hussites also did not break with the church unlike the Tabors. Ultimately these two groups should have been looked at separately not as the same despite their common origin.
Malia’s analysis of the Lutheran revolution also follows a similar path. While Luther does to a degree follow this end he does not have a Thermidor reaction with his group, the splinter group formed by Muntzer, which coincidently formed a commune, did. The French Huguenot Revolution did fit Malia’s lay out very well as did the Netherlands Revolution although they were more political than the previous two revolutions.
Malia’s next set of chapters focuses on the political revolutions of England in the 17th century and America and France in the 18th century. While the first part of the English chapter starts with the English Civil War. While the first part of the chapter follows Malia’s lay out the next part of it, The Restoration, seems to be outside of his model. While it is a Thermidor reaction it is after another Thermidor reaction with Cromwell assuming control of the Commonwealth.
It also seems that Malia does not give credit to Charles II in that Malia claims that he was restored to full monarchical control and the political clock was turned back. This Malia claims is what lead to the down fall of James II and the Glorious Revolution. Malia does not bring up that while Charles II as Monarch had many of the same powers that his father had he was much more cautious to use them because of what had happened to his father, while James II was oblivious and quite frankly an Idiot. This chapter does follow the layout of what Malia claims is a revolution, though it would have made more scene to split this chapter up to focus on the two separate revolution that occurred.
The next is the American Revolution, which does not follow Malia’s layout simply because it lacks a Thermidor reaction. This is undoubtedly because of the origins of the revolution which Malia explains quite well as the colonists viewing themselves equal to British citizens so they desired the same rights such as taxation with representation.
The next chapter deals with the French Revolution which Malia’s model fits like a glove. This is of course because he created the layout based after the French Revolution. Despite this he sums up the revolution quite well, if not a little long winded at points. All of the previous chapters also feel as though they have been building to this point with Malia delving into obscure communes and proto-socialist groups that emerged in the previous chapters to final come to a head in this chapter seemed to be Malia’s plan from the starts. However the inevitable collapse of the French revolution puts these ideas on hold until the next revolution comes to dust them off again.
The final section of Malia’s book deals with the 19th century and the build up to the Bolshevik Revolution, with the first chapter dealing with the revolts and revolutions of 1848. This chapter follows a different layout from the other chapters by following several different revolution, Malia also points out differences in those involved in this revolution. While the French Revolution was carried out by the educated elite of the third estate, this revolution was carried out by the regular people. Malia also looks at the German “revolution” created and controlled by Bismarck. This revolution however does not fit into his blue print of revolutions since it was in a scene hijacked from the intellectuals by Bismarck and turned into a conservative revolution of sort. The last half of the 19th century was next but this chapter seemed to add little to the book. It would seem that the main point of this chapter is to focuses on the creation and realization of Marxism as being the way to bring about true social revolution.
The final chapter deals with the long coming Bolshevik revolution. The final culmination of all of the revolutions and ideas that have been building from the Hussite revolution comes to a head with Lenin taking power. Malia, however, claims that this revolution both follows and does not follow his layout. With the implementation of the New Economic Policy (NEP) Lenin is committing a Thermidor reaction to his original ideals of a communist society by allowing some semblance of market. While Malia claims that the revolution does not follow his layout by being in a constant state of internal revolution. With this it seem that Malia, despite his constant building towards this moment, is not able to define it in the terms he laid out.
Malia’s book comes short of being able to define revolutions based on his layout. Even though he attempts to show every revolution as having those 3 separate stages, by doing so he lumped fringe groups in to make his point. I am also not convinced that the inclusion of the religious revolutions was necessary to proving his point. Lastly his incessant inclusion of any part of the revolution that created communes of proto-socialist society seemed like he was trying to force these revolutions to be something they were not.
This is not to say this is a bad book, quite the contrary. I enjoyed his theory that these revolutions were created but breaches of contract between the various parties’s involved in each revolution. Malia brilliantly defended this theory. Another subject came up in Malia’s book that I wish he addressed more, equality. Chapters such as his about the Hussites brought this up. The Hussites wanted to have the people be more equal with the priests in that they wanted full communion as well and though that the churches should own less land. Chapter after chapter the idea that these groups are trying to create equality hold true, while for the most part the equality they create is for a limited number of people. In Malia’s epilogue he even goes so far as to claim that future social revolutions are not likely to occur but where there is inequality one cannot be sure what will happen. In the end Malia’s book comes up a little short of its goal but it still provides an excellent base for future historical works, which should be read by anyone interested in revolutions in Europe
October 25, 2024
Quite long, but gives a decent overview of the major European revolutions. Also provides insight into liberal critiques of revolution in general, and more specifically Leninist-Marxist / Communist revolution and regimes.
July 13, 2021
To my mind, most of the approaches in the book are hopelessly outdated. Like ranking countries as "developed" or "backward", saying European colonization is no big deal because each civilization creates violence, and trying to fit unique historical revolutionary events into some kind of three-stage mould. It's interesting that he's a proponent of modernization theory but also believes revolution to be a specifically European phenomenon. Maybe he just didn't feel like studying any other regions, I don't know :)
Another thing I don't know is why would he specialize in Russian history if he hates it so obviously. In Malia's view, Imperial Russia was hopelessly backward and cruel, and Communist Russia was an overall failure and abomination. At least the French revolution created some good institutes!
Anyway, as another reviewer noted, some or even most of the revolutions in this book do not seem to fit his model. It would be a good general read on revolutionary events in Europe, but it's somewhat dry and boring.
Another thing I don't know is why would he specialize in Russian history if he hates it so obviously. In Malia's view, Imperial Russia was hopelessly backward and cruel, and Communist Russia was an overall failure and abomination. At least the French revolution created some good institutes!
Anyway, as another reviewer noted, some or even most of the revolutions in this book do not seem to fit his model. It would be a good general read on revolutionary events in Europe, but it's somewhat dry and boring.
May 1, 2018
Malia's argument starts out really strong, and his analysis of the Atlantic Revolutions (England, America, France) is brilliant, but his argument gets significantly weaker when he tries to incorporate the Russian Revolution of 1917. Still an interesting read, and one that I thoroughly enjoyed.
March 17, 2021
Perhaps life is too short to read this book. It's a bit dry, with academic style and not too easily readable. You'll learn something new but can probably live without it.
March 10, 2014
Marx famously referred to revolutions as locomotives of history and Malia expertly illustrates that by tracing history of Europe through the prism of revolutionary movements. Starting with the political and religious framework of 1000-1300 Malia outlines the evolution of revolutionary thought all the way from Hussite Bohemia to Socialist Russia. Beginning with a pack of more religiously-flavored revolutions (pre-Reformation Hussites succeeded by German/French/Dutch Reformations) he moves on to more secular/political trifecta of British, American and French revolutions, then cruises through 19th century characterized by ‘failures’ of its conservative-turned revolutionary attempts and arrives at ‘revolution to end all revolutions’ – Bolshevik Russia which in turn gives rise to the likes of Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Pol Pot and Castro.
Analysis is compelling albeit jumpy at times, the breadth of coverage is impressive and the depth is surprising given the relatively small size of the book; basic and mid-level knowledge of history is assumed, so unless you are a history junkie you will likely have to lookup a few things.
One nice bonus of the book is that before giving his own analysis/judgment Malia also provides a brief historiography of each revolution, these historiographies are absolutely fantastic and almost worth the price of the book by themselves. It is a perfect window into the rarely exposed process of ideology engineering.
As for himself Malia puts forward a view that revolutions are cumulative and he demonstrates it quite convincingly by showing the progressive radicalization of revolutionary thought through time. Obviously this radicalization is neither linear nor monotonic but the overall direction is undeniable. A few themes are explored, again as functions of time – secularism, nationalism, socialism, liberalism; a few inflection points are identified such as transition from fundamentally backwards-looking reforms to forward-looking millenniarist aspirations (with nice correlation to Enlightenment and the modern-leaning idea of progress); a few subtle transitions are described such as shifting empathis from liberty (in British and American revolutions) to equality (in French) or the shifts from political to social dimensions of a given revolutionary movement. Of course none of these can be discussed in isolation as many of these themes feed and influence each other, but Malia manages to somehow hold it all together and effectively paints the morphology of revolutionary thought as an evolving biological ecosystem – the resulting landscape is pretty fascinating. Read it and be forever immune to the lackluster attempts at analysis you hear on national television.
Analysis is compelling albeit jumpy at times, the breadth of coverage is impressive and the depth is surprising given the relatively small size of the book; basic and mid-level knowledge of history is assumed, so unless you are a history junkie you will likely have to lookup a few things.
One nice bonus of the book is that before giving his own analysis/judgment Malia also provides a brief historiography of each revolution, these historiographies are absolutely fantastic and almost worth the price of the book by themselves. It is a perfect window into the rarely exposed process of ideology engineering.
As for himself Malia puts forward a view that revolutions are cumulative and he demonstrates it quite convincingly by showing the progressive radicalization of revolutionary thought through time. Obviously this radicalization is neither linear nor monotonic but the overall direction is undeniable. A few themes are explored, again as functions of time – secularism, nationalism, socialism, liberalism; a few inflection points are identified such as transition from fundamentally backwards-looking reforms to forward-looking millenniarist aspirations (with nice correlation to Enlightenment and the modern-leaning idea of progress); a few subtle transitions are described such as shifting empathis from liberty (in British and American revolutions) to equality (in French) or the shifts from political to social dimensions of a given revolutionary movement. Of course none of these can be discussed in isolation as many of these themes feed and influence each other, but Malia manages to somehow hold it all together and effectively paints the morphology of revolutionary thought as an evolving biological ecosystem – the resulting landscape is pretty fascinating. Read it and be forever immune to the lackluster attempts at analysis you hear on national television.
May 8, 2007
I mean its interesting. He defines revolution to be a Euro-centric evolving "idea." ENDING - with the Russian Revolution (which he hates.)
Read
July 22, 2012Truly wonderful and insightful book. Good to keep in mind when looking at the current "Arab Spring" revolutions.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews