History Podcast / Revolutions

* RunningGag: "Gentleman Johnny's Party Train" became standard reference for Gen. John Burgoyne's ill-fated Sarasota expedition in Season 2. They even made a T-shirt of it (illustrated by Creator/KateBeaton, no less!)

* HoistByHisOwnPetard: It comes up so often, it's difficult to pinpoint individual instances. Especially prominent in the French Revolution. Just one example is the same mobs and public opinion that allowed Parlement to pick a fight with the King over noble privileges and win leading to their own dissolution and the end of those same noble privileges when public opinion turned on them.

* Season 6 (March-May 2017): The [[UsefulNotes/FrenchPoliticalSystem July Revolution of 1830]], with some additional supplements on the June Rebellion of 1832, the Carbonari, and Metternich.

After 1848 the general plan seems to be for Duncan to begin on the revolutions of the 20th Century, particularly the [[UsefulNotes/TheMexicanRevolution Mexican Revolution]], the [[RomanovsAndRevolutions Russian]] [[RedOctober Revolution]], and the [[NoMoreEmperors Chinese]] [[UsefulNotes/SecondSinoJapaneseWar Revolution]].

* Season 6 (March-May 2017): The [[UsefulNotes/FrenchPoliticalSystem July Revolution of 1830]]

Duncan has indicated that Season 6 is to be a short (six-episode) "bridge" between the Atlantic Revolutions covered by Seasons 2-5 and the "insanity" that is the planned subject of Season 7, the Revolutions of 1848. After that, the general plan seems to be for Duncan to begin on the revolutions of the 20th Century, particularly the [[UsefulNotes/TheMexicanRevolution Mexican Revolution]], the [[RomanovsAndRevolutions Russian]] [[RedOctober Revolution]], and the [[NoMoreEmperors Chinese]] [[UsefulNotes/SecondSinoJapaneseWar Revolution]].

* ItIsPronouncedTroPAY: There's a lot of French names in Seasons 3-4, and Duncan mangles at least half of them. He's very self-deprecating about it. He does a little better with the Spanish in Season 5, but he still managed to completely mangle to pronunciation of the major Colombian city of Cartagena in the first episode. Duncan has had a particularly hard time with the ''Vendée'' region of France, which was the epicenter of a royalist uprising during the French Revolution and which he mispronounced several different ways (as can be seen by comments suggesting he should instead try saying it like this or like that).

Duncan has indicated that Season 6 is to be a short (six-episode) "bridge" between the Atlantic Revolutions covered by Seasons 2-5 and the "insanity" that is the planned subject of Season 7, the Revolutions of 1848. After that, the general plan seems to be for Duncan to begin on the revolutions of the 20th Century, particularly the [[RomanovsAndRevolutions Russian]] [[RedOctober Revolution]] and [[NoMoreEmperors Chinese]] [[UsefulNotes/SecondSinoJapaneseWar Revolution]].

* Season 5 (June 2016-February 2017): The Latin American wars of independence, with a particular focus on UsefulNotes/SimonBolivar

* Season 5 (June 2016-present): The Latin American wars of independence, with a particular focus on UsefulNotes/SimonBolivar

Duncan announced that he would take a break during December 2016-January 2017 to finish writing his book, but after finishing the first draft of the book and the last 5-6 episodes of Season 5, he would do a mini-season on France's July Revolution of 1830 as a sort of bridge between the Atlantic Revolutions covered by Seasons 2-5 and the "insanity" that is the Revolutions of 1848. After that, the general plan seems to be for Duncan to begin on the revolutions of the 20th Century, particularly the [[RomanovsAndRevolutions Russian]] [[RedOctober Revolution]] and [[NoMoreEmperors Chinese]] [[UsefulNotes/SecondSinoJapaneseWar Revolution]].

* AlasPoorScrappy: [[invoked]] In his "obituaries" [[note]]When the point in the narrative where a significant figure dies comes, he often does a short summary of their life and career often including an appraisal of their role, their virtues and their shortcomings as well as a glimpse what their death might mean given the circumstances of the time it happened in[[/note]] for Louis XVI and Charles I he ruthlessly lists all the reasons why they ended up executed by their (former) subjects, but also points out that they were neither tyrants nor inherently evil people, did not murder their own population (let alone on purpose) and it is quite evident that he bemoans their fate, even though he clearly sees it as inevitable given their actions.

** Duncan cites the 1792 Insurrection that was led by Georges Danton as a GenreTurningPoint. He notes that while Bastille and earlier uprisings were spontaneous and unplanned events, the 1792 Insurrection was a planned revolution with a definite political program and that it would inspire and codify the revolutions of the 19th and 20th Century. He notes that UsefulNotes/VladimirLenin cited Danton as the great revolutionary strategist precisely because he wanted to use a chaotic situation to create a new form of government rather than improvise and radicalise in response to reactionary backlash.

After Season 5, Duncan plans to take a hiatus to write his book and then return to ''Revolutions'' to begin on the revolutions of the 20th Century, particularly the [[RomanovsAndRevolutions Russian]] [[RedOctober Revolution]] and [[NoMoreEmperors Chinese]] [[UsefulNotes/SecondSinoJapaneseWar Revolution]]. However, according to the website itself, the next revolution Duncan will cover are the Revolutions of 1848. (Duncan has gone back and forth on whether or not to do 1848, as on the one hand they are unquestionably worthy but on the other hand they happened in so many different countries for so many different reasons that it would be difficult to get a proper handle on them all).

'''''Revolutions''''' (2013-present) is the second history podcast by Creator/MikeDuncan. Unlike [[Podcast/TheHistoryOfRome his previous podcast]], ''Revolutions'' is not the history of one society or polity but rather a thematic series focusing on particular revolutions in the history of the modern world. To effectuate this, it is divided into seasons, with each season focusing on a particular revolution. These are:

* FillerEpisode: Due to Duncan's travels (he does Revolutions and Podcast/TheHistoryOfRome themed tours with fans) and the birth of his second child, he sometimes had to bridge a gap of several weeks. He decided to pre-record a number of supplementals (apparently they are easier to produce) on a range of subjects and release them during his absence to keep the wait time manageable.

* SlaveryIsASpecialKindOfEvil: Duncan already made allusions to the hypocrisy of preaching liberty equality and justice while holding slaves, but he is particularly hard on slave-holders during season 4 when he talks about the Haitian Revolution. He even compares the founding fathers of the US to the Haitian "big whites", the slaveowners who profited most from the colonial class and race system.

* RebeliousRebel: Naturally, people change sides or rebel against the initial rebellion more than once. Duncan has a particular fascination with those that started out at the most radical and leading edge of a particular revolutionary wave only to be overtaken by events ultimately to be branded conservatives or even reactionaries, not because their own opinions had changed, but because the views which were considered "radical" had shifted so drastically.

* ItIsPronouncedTroPAY: There's a lot of French names in Seasons 3-4, and Duncan mangles at least half of them. He's very self-deprecating about it. He does a little better with the Spanish in Season 5, but he still managed to completely mangle to pronunciation of the major Colombian city of Cartagena in the first episode. Duncan has had a particularly hard time with the ''Vendée'' region of France, which was the epicenter of a royalist uprising during the French Revolution and which he mispronounced several different ways (as can be seen by comments suggesting he should indeed try saying it like this or like that).

* MagnificentBastard:[[invoked]] Duncan's opinion of Talleyrand (whom he considers highly fascinating), which he highlights both in the main narrative and in the supplemental episode dedicated to him. Duncan points out Talleyrand's rampant corruption and his willingness to sell out/betray almost any master he served as well and lists the number of different regimes Talleyrand thrived under.[[note]]To some extent, he, like many Anglophone historians, oversell Talleyrand's talents and ignore his famous blunders. For all his talent in diplomacy, Talleyrand had a major role in fomenting the only active conflict between France and the United States of America, during the Quasi-War which is incredible considering that even the Jacobin government succeeded in keeping USA neutral and that it fell to Napoleon to finally make peace[[/note]]

* VelvetRevolution: Mostly averted for the revolutions up to and including season 5. In the case of the French Revolution, Duncan discusses the fact that later observers separated the "so-called" good revolution of 1789-1791 from the bad revolutions of 1792-1794. This is based on a more classic interpretation of the Revolution (the 19th Century liberal tradition), rather than the 20th Century one which saw the revolution as unified with continuity in all periods. Duncan points out that the violence and fear and factionalism was not so great in the early years of the events, and that the destabilization primarily came from the counter-revolution who opposed and triggered popular agitations, whereas the events that came after saw popular revolutionary violence, war and emergency measures with IconOfRebellion like Barnave, Mirabeau, Dumouriez, Brissot, Danton, Marat, Robespierre going overnight from heroes to villains[[note]]The historian Francois Furet pointed out that violence had been part of the revolution from the Storming of the Bastille, the Great Fear onwards, with the Women's March to Versailles being essentially GunboatDiplomacy to force the King to willingly ransom himself as hostage to the Parisians. Furet being a liberal himself, used this as evidence to argue that the Revolution was fundamentally illiberal in-and-of-itself. Duncan, like Furet, also neglects the fact that the most radical achievements of the Revolution, universal male suffrage, ending the final vestiges of feudalism, social mobility and meritocracy in administration and army, and the abolition of slavery came from the second revolution, which ultimately codified modern democracy far more than the first one did[[/note]].

** In the case of the French Revolution, Duncan openly hates Jean-Paul Marat and describes him as the PsychoPartyMember of the Revolution, which was indeed the common view of Marat by 19th and early 20th Century historians. He was and indeed remains more controversial than Robespierre. More recent historians and writers have emphasized Marat's instances of moderation, such as when he opposed the Anglophobia common among Revolutions, defending English culture and arguing against narrow nationalism[[note]]A view credited to him by Norman Hampson, no Marat-fan, in ''The Perfidy of Albion''[[/note]], the fact that he was the only Revolution who advocated colonial independence during the events[[note]]as noted by Aime Cesaire, the Mauritanian poet[[/note]], that he often intervened to save political opponents from attacks[[note]]such as when he rescued Theroigne de Mericourt, a Girondin, from attacks by Revolutionary Women's groups[[/note]] and that most of his wild accusations in his papers (about Mirabeau's corruption, Dumouriez's defection, the war being a mistake) [[TheExtremistWasRight turned out to be accurate]]. Duncan is also generally dismissive of Louis Antoine de Saint-Just who French leftists and other historians regard as [[ICouldaBeenAContender the great tragic prodigy of the revolution]] but [[YouthIsWastedOnTheDumb Duncan sees as a dilettante young man too arrogant for his own good]], which was the view of Simon Schama, author of the widely divisive ''Citizens'' which Duncan cites in his Bibliography.
* VelvetRevolution: Mostly averted for the revolutions up to and including season 5. In the case of the French Revolution, Duncan discusses the fact that later observers separated the "so-called" good revolution of 1789-1791 from the bad revolutions of 1792-1794. This is based on a more classic interpretation of the Revolution (the 19th Century liberal tradition), rather than the 20th Century one which saw the revolution as more or less unified. Duncan points out that the violence and fear and factionalism was not so great in the early years of the events, and that the destabilization primarily came from the counter-revolution who opposed and triggered popular agitations, whereas the events that came after saw popular revolutionary violence, war and emergency measures with IconOfRebellion like Barnave, Mirabeau, Dumouriez, Brissot, Danton, Marat, Robespierre going overnight from heroes to villains[[note]]The historian Francois Furet pointed out that violence had been part of the revolution from the Storming of the Bastille, the Great Fear onwards, with the Women's March to Versailles being essentially GunboatDiplomacy to force the King to willingly ransom himself as hostage to the Parisians. Furet being a liberal himself, used this as evidence to argue that the Revolution was fundamentally illiberal in-and-of-itself. Duncan, like Furet, also neglects the fact that the most radical achievements of the Revolution, universal male suffrage, ending the final vestiges of feudalism, social mobility and meritocracy in administration and army, and the abolition of slavery came from the second revolution, which ultimately codified modern democracy[[/note]].

* FramingTheGuiltyParty: Duncan points out that many of the KangarooCourt s during the French Revolution actually ''had'' a case to make, but hurt their own credibility by making up ridiculous claims of supposed crimes that clearly did not exist. One irony, which Duncan doesn't deal is the fact that some of the revolutionaries openly argued that Jacques-Pierre Brissot was a police spy based on rumors and accusations by the likes of Marat and Desmoullins. The latter came to regret the effect of his anti-Brissotin pamphlet. But in the latter half of the 20th Century, the historian [[https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/3403050/darnton_brissot.pdf?sequence=2 Robert Darnton]] and [[http://quod.lib.umich.edu/w/wsfh/0642292.0034.006/--uses-of-power-lafayette-and-brissot-in-1792?rgn=main;view=fulltext Sylvia Neely]] found evidence that Brissot was indeed a police spy]] and political saboteur.