This article seeks to identify and explain the historical links between democracy and revolution in Latin America. It first defines and analyses`democratic' and`revolutionary' traditions in the continent. It notes the precocity of nineteenth-century Latin American liberalism which, stimulated by the independence struggles, carried implications for the subsequent onset of democracy in the twentieth century. It then presents a typology of five twentieth-century political permutations (social democracy, revolutionary populism, statist populism, socialist revolution, and authoritarian reaction), seeking to tease out the corresponding relationships between the two`traditions'. It concludes (inter alia) that the current triumph of liberal democracy in Latin America, while in part attributable to historical precedent, is also significantly contingent, and dependent on the apparent exhaustion of the revolutionary tradition.This article tries to unravel two crucial threads in Latin America's political history ± democracy and revolution, their respective`traditions' and mutual relationships. It begins with some some conceptual clarification. For, while starting articles with a pernickety`naming of parts' is not necessarily good rhetorical practice, in this case, when we are handling several slippery parts ± revolution, democracy, tradition ± it is probably as well to make the attempt, in order to avoid dropping things and generating confusion. Following a brief clarification, therefore, I offer a broad and schematic analysis of democratic and revolutionary traditions in Latin America which invites comparison with other cases.