The DOI matches its Crossref record.
An Age of Imperial Revolutions
Abstract
When the Venezuelan creole Francisco de Miranda led an expeditionary force to the shores of his native land to liberate it from Spanish rule in the summer of 1806, he brought with him a new weapon for making revolutions: a printing press. He hoped that his band of white, black, and mulatto patriots would start a revolt to free a continent with an alliance of swords and ideas. After dawdling for ten days, Miranda learned that royal troops (also white, black, and mulatto) were marching from Caracas. He withdrew before the two multiracial forces could clash. Consider Miranda's reasons for retreat: The nation he sought to free from its chains was not, in his opinion, a nation at all. While Venezuelans yearned for “Civil Liberty,” they did not know how to grasp and protect it. They needed a liberation that would tutor them in the ways of liberty and fraternity, to create a nation of virtuous citizens out of a colony of subjects. This was why Miranda treated the printing press, a portable factory of words about liberty and sovereignty, as part of the arsenal of change: he wanted to create public opinion where there was none. But faced with the prospect of a violent clash and a scourge of “opposition and internal divisions,” of a war waged mainly with swords, he preferred to pull out and bide his time.1
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“A number of transnational histories have pointed to the ways in which revolutionary events contain an international dimension that supersedes the national-state frame (e.g. Stone 2002; Adelman 2008; Hunt 2010).”
From Within and Beyond the “Fourth Generation” of Revolutionary Theory (2016) · cites this paper as Adelman 2008
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Within and Beyond the “Fourth Generation” of Revolutionary Theory
Lawson, G. (2016) · Sociological Theory · doi:10.1177/0735275116649221 · Cited by 126
Metadata
- Authors
- Adelman, J.
- Corresponding author
- Adelman, Jeremy
- Venue
- The American Historical Review
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2008-04
- Volume
- 113
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 319-340
- ISSN
- 0002-8762 (ISSN-L)
- 1937-5239
- OpenAlex
- W2088521608
- Cited by
- 165
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 43 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 12.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The American Historical Review (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › Historical Studies in Latin America
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › European Political History Analysis
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › Colonialism, slavery, and trade
- Keywords
- Francisco de Miranda, printing press, revolution, Spanish colonialism, Venezuela, multiethnic society, public opinion, nation-building, civil liberties
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review