What do you think?
Rate this book
Past and Present: To Learn from History
How can our understanding of the past help to solve our present political or economic conditions and conflicts? Edited by Swedish author Kurt Almqvist and historian Mattias Hessérus, the essays in this volume range from discussions of the history of ideas and ideologies to evolutionary psychology, as writers configure new ways in which to apply history to today’s concerns such as international relations, geopolitics, economics and the role of the individual―as well as human nature at large―throughout history. The essays in this anthology derive from the Engelsberg Seminar held in Västmanland, Sweden, in 2019.
Authors include: Erica Benner, John Bew, Phillip Bobbitt, Vernon Bogdanor, Michael Burleigh, Cory J. Clark, Christopher Coker, Jonathan Fenby, Niall Ferguson, Janne Haaland Matlary, Josef Joffe, Rob Johnson, Elisabeth Kendall, Iain Martin, Rana Mitter, Andrew Monaghan, Fraser Nelson, Gudrun Persson, Peter Ricketts and Brendan Simms.
Authors include: Erica Benner, John Bew, Phillip Bobbitt, Vernon Bogdanor, Michael Burleigh, Cory J. Clark, Christopher Coker, Jonathan Fenby, Niall Ferguson, Janne Haaland Matlary, Josef Joffe, Rob Johnson, Elisabeth Kendall, Iain Martin, Rana Mitter, Andrew Monaghan, Fraser Nelson, Gudrun Persson, Peter Ricketts and Brendan Simms.
- GenresHistory
376 pages, Hardcover
First published June 23, 2022
1 person is currently reading
59 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
Read
April 19, 2025The past as a social laboratory, that is what this collection says it focuses on, and I admit that sounds very attractive. After all, history can be seen as the total sum of experiences and situations in which people, animals and things have interacted with each other, whether or not in a respectful manner (the latter already is a value judgement). And so you could learn a lot by looking at that treasure of experiences. The various contributions in this collection attempt to do this to a greater or lesser extent, each with its own perspective or theme, and also with very uneven success.
It is an ineradicable classic: “Historia magister vitae”, history as a teacher. But what does that mean? That is not a simple question, there are quite a few issues with this statement. Does 'historia' mean the past itself, or its account, i.e. historiography? Those are two interrelated, but very different things. We have known for a long time, but even more so since the Narrative Turn of the 1970s-1980s, that writing history is not so simple and straightforward, at least not if you expect that this writing provides an objective, almost definitive picture of the past reality (Wie es eigentlich gewesen..."). After all, the traces of that past are limited, not everything has been preserved, and when looking at that past, the location and background of the viewer always plays an important role. So different stories of the past are always possible. Which doesn't mean that anything goes; fortunately, we are past that radical phase of the Narrative Turn (although apparently not in audiovisual historical fiction). The relative consensus now is that historiography should be a dialogue with the traces of the past in a scientifically controlled process (the historical method, combined with as much transparency as is possible), in which an attempt is made to arrive at an image of the past that is as truthful as possible, an image that is always open to correction and completion, so always provisional. The saying 'progressive insight' applies perfectly here.
Okay, with that introduction I can immediately hear you asking the question: if the reconstruction of the past is so complex and difficult, and never finished, how on earth can you really learn from it? Well, that is indeed a question that cannot simply be dismissed. For some it is enough to firmly claim that you absolutely cannot learn ANY lessons from the past. But just like with the Narrative Turn, that is a far too easy and above all unfruitful excuse, I think. Precisely because the past is such a rich collection of experiences and situations, you must take up the challenge and try to ask and answer the question of relevance for the present in a responsible way. For all I care, you can call it a matter of existential responsibility.
I'm going to make a bold attempt of what I think could be achievable lessons of the past (at least in theory). First, the reconstruction of a given past (with all the caveats above) provides insight into how a given situation evolved and provides context for understanding complex things. You can call this utilitarian, but for me that already is a step further, namely taking specific actions based on knowledge from the past. The latter seems to me a bit more problematic, because reality, including that of the present, can never be fully understood and therefore is never predictable. I am more inclined to adhere to insights that allow you to better understand salient themes and issues from your own time and thus - best case - avoid making too many mistakes. In fact, this simply means that insight into the past can mainly protect you from hubris based on incorrect assessments. Sounds minimalistic, but it nevertheless is quite something (as history learns, pun intended).
With all this it should be clear that I am not a fan of discerning clearly defined patterns, let alone laws that govern history: there is only one law in history, and that is that there are no laws (the equivalent of “it’s absolutely true that there is no absolute truth”). I would like to make a certain exception for patterns: distinguishing trends and processes in the past certainly is a valuable approach, provided it is done in a methodologically sound way; but elevating tendencies and processes to the level of legal certainties is a completely different matter. In that sense, I find the term 'social laboratory' that is promoted in this volume, a bit risky. Because it suggests too much that as a researcher you can manipulate past reality, experiment with it, in order to discover great truths. I can only accept it in the passive sense, as indicated at the beginning, namely as a qualification indicating the rich complexity of the past.
Finally, but not least, it remains a fact that looking at the past – and I especially don't mean looking nostalgically – is simply fascinating and entertaining, and to a certain extent even provides pleasure. I know this sounds old-fashioned, but I personally think it is certainly not to be despised. I'll end with this, and I'm conscious I've probably only lifted just a tip of the veil. I'll guess I'll come back to this review, to adjust and/or complement. Feel free to comment!
It is an ineradicable classic: “Historia magister vitae”, history as a teacher. But what does that mean? That is not a simple question, there are quite a few issues with this statement. Does 'historia' mean the past itself, or its account, i.e. historiography? Those are two interrelated, but very different things. We have known for a long time, but even more so since the Narrative Turn of the 1970s-1980s, that writing history is not so simple and straightforward, at least not if you expect that this writing provides an objective, almost definitive picture of the past reality (Wie es eigentlich gewesen..."). After all, the traces of that past are limited, not everything has been preserved, and when looking at that past, the location and background of the viewer always plays an important role. So different stories of the past are always possible. Which doesn't mean that anything goes; fortunately, we are past that radical phase of the Narrative Turn (although apparently not in audiovisual historical fiction). The relative consensus now is that historiography should be a dialogue with the traces of the past in a scientifically controlled process (the historical method, combined with as much transparency as is possible), in which an attempt is made to arrive at an image of the past that is as truthful as possible, an image that is always open to correction and completion, so always provisional. The saying 'progressive insight' applies perfectly here.
Okay, with that introduction I can immediately hear you asking the question: if the reconstruction of the past is so complex and difficult, and never finished, how on earth can you really learn from it? Well, that is indeed a question that cannot simply be dismissed. For some it is enough to firmly claim that you absolutely cannot learn ANY lessons from the past. But just like with the Narrative Turn, that is a far too easy and above all unfruitful excuse, I think. Precisely because the past is such a rich collection of experiences and situations, you must take up the challenge and try to ask and answer the question of relevance for the present in a responsible way. For all I care, you can call it a matter of existential responsibility.
I'm going to make a bold attempt of what I think could be achievable lessons of the past (at least in theory). First, the reconstruction of a given past (with all the caveats above) provides insight into how a given situation evolved and provides context for understanding complex things. You can call this utilitarian, but for me that already is a step further, namely taking specific actions based on knowledge from the past. The latter seems to me a bit more problematic, because reality, including that of the present, can never be fully understood and therefore is never predictable. I am more inclined to adhere to insights that allow you to better understand salient themes and issues from your own time and thus - best case - avoid making too many mistakes. In fact, this simply means that insight into the past can mainly protect you from hubris based on incorrect assessments. Sounds minimalistic, but it nevertheless is quite something (as history learns, pun intended).
With all this it should be clear that I am not a fan of discerning clearly defined patterns, let alone laws that govern history: there is only one law in history, and that is that there are no laws (the equivalent of “it’s absolutely true that there is no absolute truth”). I would like to make a certain exception for patterns: distinguishing trends and processes in the past certainly is a valuable approach, provided it is done in a methodologically sound way; but elevating tendencies and processes to the level of legal certainties is a completely different matter. In that sense, I find the term 'social laboratory' that is promoted in this volume, a bit risky. Because it suggests too much that as a researcher you can manipulate past reality, experiment with it, in order to discover great truths. I can only accept it in the passive sense, as indicated at the beginning, namely as a qualification indicating the rich complexity of the past.
Finally, but not least, it remains a fact that looking at the past – and I especially don't mean looking nostalgically – is simply fascinating and entertaining, and to a certain extent even provides pleasure. I know this sounds old-fashioned, but I personally think it is certainly not to be despised. I'll end with this, and I'm conscious I've probably only lifted just a tip of the veil. I'll guess I'll come back to this review, to adjust and/or complement. Feel free to comment!
January 3, 2024
This book contains edited texts from a seminar held in Sweden in 2019 on the theme of “applied history”: it purports to offer a collection of lessons from the past, around current themes. As with any anthology the level is very variable, sometimes rather theoretical-philosophical, sometimes banal journalistic. What also strikes me is that the ideological inspiration comes from very different angles: sometimes explicitly right-wing conservative (Niall Ferguson's essay, for example, is very pamphleteer), sometimes more left-wing (with warnings against nationalism and populism). And because it is so closely related to current events, its relevance also quickly becomes outdated. In my History account on Goodreads I try to go into the theme of 'learning lessons from history' in more detail: see https://www.goodreads.com/review/show....
August 9, 2024
2,5/5*
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews