An Interview with Margaret MacMillan

Donald A. Yerxa:

How is history used in civic discourse?

Margaret MacMillan:

It is used in many ways: to mobilize people around a common theme, whether it’s a grievance or triumph or hope for the future; to construct both individual and national identities; and to make analogies, teach lessons, and convey information. History can be misused. History can be dangerous when leaders claim we should do this or that because history teaches us it is the right thing to do. I argue that we need to look at such assertions more skeptically.

Yerxa:

What are some of the more egregious ways that history has been abused?

MacMillan:

Balkan national identities rely heavily on history. But it’s a very partial history, designed only to show that a particular people—whether it’s Croat or Bulgarian—has always been a distinct nation. Now that is a very tricky concept. People didn’t even define themselves as nations before the 19th century in most places. History is dangerous when it’s used to portray a current enemy as someone who has always been hostile. In certain nationalist histories the Serbs have been portrayed as Orthodox Christians fighting on the front line against Islam, and the Muslims have always been their enemy. But that isn’t what happened at all. For much of Balkan history, Muslims and Christians lived very comfortably together.

Osama bin Laden and other fundamentalists often paint pictures of an idyllic past, an Eden where everything worked perfectly. Society worked well; people knew their place; there was harmony. But then some fell away from the faith or outsiders came (in the case of Bin Laden, the Crusaders and then Western imperialists). This kind of history can be a very powerful mobilizing force. Marx used history in this way: primitive communism was a wonderful Eden. A made-up past is often used to portray a future that will be a paradise for all.

A Norman Rockwell illustration from Everett Titsworth Tomlinson, Scouting with Daniel Boone (Grosset and Dunlap, 1914).

Yerxa:

What would be a better use of history?

MacMillan:

History helps us to understand other people. I know people better when I know something of their past. It is impossible to understand the American black community unless you know the history of slavery and the very complex relations between the races. How can you make any sense of the recent incident with Professor Henry Louis Gates and the Cambridge police unless you know something of how tricky race has been in America? In Ireland there is an interesting process going on where Republican historians are accepting that Irish Protestants and Catholics have not always been enemies. So history can be used not just to understand others, but also as a means of reconciliation between enemies.

Yerxa:

You join a chorus of commentators who note that history is wildly popular these days. Why is there this public appetite for history now? Are you fearful that this appetite is not being adequately nourished?

MacMillan:

It is fascinating, isn’t it? Some historians are quick to distinguish between real history and this nostalgic “history craze.” The heritage business is a form of entertainment. In affluent societies there are people with money and leisure time, and they don’t all want to sit around in Florida. They travel to historic sites and reconstructions and witness reenactments. There is also a sense that we are living in a rapidly changing world, and I think we feel this even more than in past decades. There have been some real ups and downs: climate change, the end of the Cold War, the shift in international power relations, the huge electronic revolution, and so on. Society is changing fast, and not always for the better. People look to the future with a certain amount of apprehension. Oddly enough, I think Americans do more of this now than during the Cold War. I was talking the other day to someone who was very concerned about what it is going to be like for our grandchildren. Aside from the threat of nuclear war, that’s...