A New Dictionary of the French Revolution (review)

New reference works on a period as complex as the French Revolution are usually to be welcomed, and there is much in this volume that is of value — some clear (though not innovative) maps, a substantial chronology, and a great deal of generally well-presented information. However, one thing that is required of such a work is that it be reliable and, as far as possible, comprehensive. Unfortunately, a well-informed reader does not have to advance very far into the alphabetical sequence of entries offered here before serious doubts arise on this score. Indeed, the first paragraph of the first entry, on 'Absolute Monarchy', asserts both that 'Absolutisme [. . .] is a caricature of seventeenth- and eighteenth-century realities', and that '[i]t was a matter of blood and inheritance, since the king personified the absolutist state, and was accountable to God for it' (p. 1). As here, it often seems as if entries, even substantial ones, have been roughly cut down from much longer originals. The selection and titling of topics, in a book with no detailed contents list (or, indeed, index of entries) can also appear arbitrary: for instance, the third entry is 'Administrative Framework of France, 1790', but there is no corresponding entry for the same topic at any other stage of events; the fourth entry is 'Alliance of Throne and Altar', a brief summary of Church-State relations since the 1500s, but who would know to find it under such a title? The choice of subtopics to cover within articles often seems arbitrary too: that on 'Assignats', for example, offers no details on their history between late 1790 and February 1797, glossing over the consequences of their inflation in a single, vague sentence. The entry 'Bastille, Taking of the' manages in its first paragraph to scramble both the material causation and the political responsibility for the events of 11-14 July. Further on, there is an entry for 'Caen in Rebellion (1793)', and both Lyon and Marseille have entries for their Federalist episodes in that year; Bordeaux, however, has no entry at all. This pattern is continued throughout: an article on 'Naval Officers' but not one on the Navy; one on 'Army' but not on military officers; an article on 'Public Opinion on the Eve of the Revolution' that invokes freemasonry but not academies, scurrilous pamphlets but not the Society of Thirty, Habermas (in passing) but not Darnton. The entry for 'Restaurants' is as long as that for 'Representatives on Mission'. Students searching for clarification on the cahiers de doléances will find it, eventually, under the heading of 'Statements of Complaint', a translation so unusual that Google's only citation of it is this volume. This is one of many entries that fail to provide references to obvious further reading. Although, unusually, this dictionary uses endnotes and a bibliography, its range of secondary suggestions is narrow and inconsistent. Overall, then, this is not a title that can be recommended.