[[Comparative Research]], [[History]], [[Frameworks and Theories on the Mechanics of Historical Change]] # Pattern and Repertoire in History Authors: [[Bertrand Roehner]], [[Tony Syme]] ## Summary The book describes an analytical and comparative approach to history, explains why its useful and then tries to apply the methodology to three sets of historical events -- Revolutions, Strikes and Wars -- which are further subdivided and analyzed. The author argues that people draw from a repertoire of behaviour, which creates regularities in historical processes. Tradition, religion, culture, biology and societal memory puts constraints on behaviour and makes some actions more likely than others. Imitating successful behaviour of others is also a common collective trait and we only improve or innovate on our behaviour if it no longer works. We can therefore say that behaviours have an evolutionary history; artefacts or fossils that can be traced through time. This repertoire of behaviour leads to similarities in how historical processes evolve because humans react similarly across time and regions. The comparative methodology breaks historical events into subcomponents which can be more easily compared. The French Revolution was unique in totality, but by breaking it down into a sequence of elements (such as the storming of the Bastille or the meeting of the Estates-General) we can compare across the smaller elements. We can also abstract this sequence of events and map them to a sequence of comparable events in other countries. This method is used to analyze processes of cause-and-effect and extract similarities, differences, and patterns in order to understand how history evolved. We can then use this knowledge to understand how the future might evolve. For example, the French Revolution shared many detailed similarities with previous French revolts, likely as a result of a memory or knowledge of those events. Similarly, although Churchill thought the Japanese were crazy for joining the war, from their perspective it was perfectly rational: they had a history of fighting a larger foe and winning. The method can also be applied across countries which don't have a shared history. Goldstone examines the revolutionary process in his book and demonstrates that the same process of revolution is common to all Eurasian countries, dependent on human reactions to certain chains of events. In particular the revolutions in Britain and France had many similarities: state financial problems, sale of church estates, execution of the king, coming to power of an individual. Once revolutionary movements start the dynamics are very similar. Lastly, the book describes the pitfalls and successes of prediction using historical analogy such as Friedman's unsuccessful prediction of US war with Japan based on a type of rocket that was physically impossible, or Churchill's wildly successful prediction of the first battles in World War 1 which were realized almost to the day. Another interesting prediction is General de Gaulle's prediction of the course of WW2 before Germany had even invaded France, claiming that WW2 was a world war and that Germany would be defeated by American planes and equipment. ## Review In the age of data science, the method of comparing historical episodes (or reasoning by historical analog) is pretty common, especially in the macro-investing community. Reading this book serves as an incredibly interesting guide for how to do that kind of analysis correctly. Much of today's macro-investing research likely falls into the trap of reasoning from superficial similarities rather than from similarities in historical processes. There is likely a large grey area between how much abstraction can be applied to historical events in order to compare them, but when done properly it results in phenomenal predictions (such as Churchill's prediction of a specific battle). Although I really enjoyed this book, both for aggregating the key ideas of a number of authors and for giving a large amount of suggested reading, I would not recommend this as a first book on comparative or analytical history. If you are interested in this topic, you would be better off reading "War and Peace and War" which is more fun to read and builds a theory around empire formation using comparative history. ## Reading Notes - Important or significant historical events can be broken down into sequences of elements. - Although these larger events may be unique, the elements and their sequence can occur frequently across time and regions. - We can compare the elements and sequences to find patterns or processes. - Tilly introduced the idea of repertoires of behaviour or collective action for social groups. Repetition of behaviours can be ascribed to the tendency for humans to imitate those behaviours they know about, particularly those that are successful. When a behaviour fails we evolve it slightly until it works. We can therefore say that behaviours have an evolutionary history; artefacts or fossils that can be traced through time. - The book is more concerned with the course of events rather than the cause, although it does look at why some revolutionary sequences fail versus why some are successful. - There are forerunners to the revolutionary movement in the decades leading up to 1789. - Revolutions in small countries were unlikely to succeed. - Revolutions in Britain and France had many similarities: state financial problems, sale of church estates, execution of the king, coming to power of an individual. Once revolutionary movements start the dynamics are the similar. - The entrenchment of the old regime and the power of nobility, or supporters of maintaining order, are important factors driving the revolutionary dynamic. - In the three small european revolution attempts (Geneva, Netherlands, and Belgium) there was: - a clear influence from the american revolution - a temptation by regions to reach for autonomy, and - the role of the large Prussian state in restoring order. - Goldstone argues that revolutions are often triggered by high public debt. On the eve of the revolution in France 50% of the budget was going to interest payments - After some revolutions overthrowing individual power, there is a period of chaotic collective rule, which ends in the return of a individual power unless there was no monarchy/individual power to begin with. - Having a monarchy does not mean it had absolute power. In some places the nobles had the decision over who becomes king. - The shift in national identities away from religion to language influenced the disintegration of some nations and strengthened the unity of others. - The role of the church was to form the ideological and cultural foundation of a nation: what can or cannot be said, read, thought or written. In the west that role is now played by the media. In communist countries it is played by the communist party. - The Estates-General was a meeting between clergy, nobility and bourgeoisie representatives. It was a key building block to the revolution. What made this one different? What behaviours were repetitious of history and which were innovations? - The french revolution could have followed one of two kinds of insurrection: defensive or offensive. - It was very similar to the insurrection of 1357, which was also offensive. - There were a number of disturbances in the decades and years leading up to the explosion of unrest in 1788-1789. - The intervention of the parisian population through either defensive (barricade) or offensive (deaths, executions, attacks) revolts, led by bourgeouise leaders is a common element. - When debt levels are high, debt service costs are high and the ordinary means of increasing revenue are no longer sufficient the state has 4 options: 1. Obligatory loans at low rates or swapping high rate debt for low rate debt. 2. create money 3. confiscate domestic assets 4. expand territories and confiscate assets or increased tax base. - Confiscating Church property falls in option 3m without it the Revolution would have fallen into bankruptcy. - Church property confiscation raises less resistance when done as part as part of a larger movement such as Reformation or Revolution - In times of civil war, without a dominant power and under the perception of external threat, domestic prisoners opposed to the revolution are often executed. - Some of the key building blocks of the French Revolution were very similar to events that occurred before. The reason might be that they were modeled on those previous events: meeting of the Estates-General, insurrection of parisians, confiscations of church property, execution of prisoners. - Some characteristics of revolutions had a high correlation to outcome, in the case of the French revolution its the involvement of the national guard. - Number of periodicals (or social interaction) could be a factor in revolutionary movements. - What were some of the building blocks leading up to the War of Independence: 1. The 13 colonies had a relatively large population compared to other colonies or european countries. 2. The 13 colonies had a large sustained growth in population. 3. The colonies had become unified through war against the Indians. - What were some of the components of the revolution: 1. Fiscal revolts: The colonies were angered by the imposition of taxes. This is similar to what happened with stamp duties two years before the French revolution & taxes applied to Portugal being a precursor to Portuguese independence from Spain. 2. Lack of historic governance and enforcement of laws by the English led to revolts when they did finally try to exert control. No one was prosecuted in the Boston Tea Party and taxes were not properly enforced. This is similar to Texas being almost self-governed under Mexican sovereignty. - The british were at a military disadvantage against the Americans they didn't have a large standing army. - The main issue for the americans was maintaining cohesion. Every citizen had to declare that the war was just and that they would not aid the british. Some prominent loyalists were banished, some were convicted and executed. Loyalist estates were confiscated which helped finance the war. - What allowed the american war of independence to be successful?: - Strong cohesion bult through successive wars and communication between the colonies. - Anti-monarchy sentiment in the years leading up to the war. - English resistance not strong enough and unable to afford the necessary resistance. - The ties between the colonies and the monarchy were cut too suddenly and without a build-up of anti-monarchy sentiment. ### Strikes - Mushroom strikes are strikes that are started by the people rather than the unions. - They tend to have the same pattern of a rapid ascent with a tailing off of opinion that lasts in total around a month. - They are rarely successful although they are more successful if its a sit-in strike or if the enforcement (military & police) are on the side of the strikers. ### Wars - In wars of territorial expansions there are always limitations that force patterns onto the wars and battles. - Battles in continental Europe from 1600-1800 were fought in the same general areas. - Food supply was always an important consideration. Military movements through certain areas could cause price increases and shortages. - Battles were also more likely to occur in spring & summer. - The state was constrained by income and productive capacity. - There are a number of examples of a specific type of territorial expansion in Europe in which: 1. A ruling class with popular support comes to power 2. An army based on conscription 3. Military successes and building an empire 4. Taxing the new territories allows the maintenance of the army. 5. Its enemies unite against it. 6. Growing internal discontent (from the rise of the upper class) and external pressure on the empire which returns to former borders/territories. - Sweden modernized its military leading to territorial expansion. Sweden was a great power in the Westphalia Treaty. - The Napoleonic wars were similar to World War 2 and had many similar features. - In addition to economic and geographic constraints, states are also constrained by military tradition or repertoire of military actions. - For the english that means subsidies to allies and limited landings. - Until 1800-1802 the French military strategies employed were the same used in earlier conflicts. Then Napolean innovated. There were no previous compaigns into Prussia. - From Churchill's perspective it was irrational for Japan to go to war. But from Japan's perspective it was rational because their strategy was successful historically. They had a history of going up against bigger countries and winning. - The actions the Japanese took such as surprise attacks, going up against bigger nations, looking for the "one big war" were historically successful strategies & therefore were in the repertoire of japanese behaviours. - There are regularities in the logistics of war imposed by constraints on waging war. Size of armies and ability of war is dependent on the centralized power of a state. During wars states become more centralized. - There are only so many ways wars can be financed: - higher taxes - short term loans (central bank) - long term loans (citizens) - direct monetization - default - These constraints create regular economic and monetary outcomes, such as hyperinflations happening in the wake of a war, as a result of monetization. - There are a number of examples of brilliant and detailed historical forecasts based on a familiarity with history and using intuition: - Churchill predicting the progression of a certain battle in World War 1. - De Gaulle anticipating the outcome of World War 2. - A book predicting generalities about World War 1, 15 years in advance. - Other times, society has ignored the clear signs of future outcomes such as the plan laid out by the Nazis.