Atef Shahat Said begins with a vignette about participating in the Egyptian Revolution in its famous Tahrir camp and in another important mode of action, albeit understudied in the Egyptian case, known as the popular committees. He asks why Tahrir Square was more visible and became metonymic with the revolution. After situating the discussion within the larger quandaries of the Egyptian Revolution, Said presents his approach: lived contingency. Lived contingency refers to studying how revolutionary actors made decisions or failed to in relation to uncertainties and unpredictabilities about power on the ground but with an eye to the unlimited possibilities at the same time. This approach has three critical aspects: agential contingency, spatial contingency, and radical and/or uncalculated unbounding. To properly analyze revolutions, especially cases of troubled revolutionary trajectories, he argues, lived contingency is needed in the study of revolutions.