Weaponising history
A recent opinion piece by Simon Schama on political and military misuses of history sparked a huge, and varied, Twitter response. ANNA WHITELOCK took stock of the debate
In May, Simon Schama (@simon_ schama) wrote an essay in the Financial Times, discussing how and when history is weaponised for war. The historian argued that “bad history can kill. Those who butcher the truth may end up butchering people. Every day, the news from Ukraine says as much.” He continued: “Openness to self-criticism, the mark of strong, honest history, is not – as is sometimes said by flag-waggers and drum-beaters – a sign of national self-hatred. On the contrary, it represents an optimistic patriotic faith that, in free societies, the cohesion of national community is better served by the examination of truth than by otiose flattery.”
As you would expect, Schama’s article prompted much discussion on Twitter.
Tom Moore (@PaperMissiles) enthused that “Simon Schama has done us all immense service by taking the time to turn his authority and judgment, his clarity, against a world intentionally clouded by lies.” Andy Carter (@andykerrcarter) tweeted: “Excellent analysis as ever from [Schama], not only on Putin’s misuse of history but on that by the likes of [Hungary’s prime minister] Orbán and [Turkish president] Erdoğan. The nuances of a complex and conflicted past cannot be reduced to black and white tales of goodies and baddies, something which our own government doesn’t grasp.”
There was also some critique, however. Sam (@0151Sam64) pointed out that the piece included “not a word about British, US bad history in the pursuit of power… Just all those nasty nations and leaders.” Schama responded: “Believe me, I have plenty to say on those prize examples… space [was] limited and [I] was concentrating on bad history as driver of war… Stay tuned.”
Debate was also sparked by Schama’s concluding section on Ireland, in which he wrote: “Sinn Féin, once wedded to the perpetuation of historical grievance, may well have become the majority party in Northern Ireland’s assembly… with a promise that its responsibilities are first and foremost to the social well-being of all the people.” Brian Walker (@bwalker347) noted: “Schama’s terrific article on ‘bad history’ and ‘tedious victimhood’ slams Putin on Ukraine but praises Ireland – including potentially Sinn Féin, if they really are committed to a new vision of Ireland.” While praising Schama’s overview, David Rieff (@davidrieff) thought that it featured a “far too optimistic conclusion”. Jonny (@gawanorniron) was more condemnatory: “[Schama] ruins a good article with a ludicrous example. Sinn Féin are the absolute masters of ‘bad history’ and ‘tedious victimhood’.”
With Sinn Féin now confirmed as the largest party in the Northern Ireland Assembly, only time will tell if and how far Schama is an optimist or a realist.
Anna Whitelock is professor of the history of monarchy at City, University of London
rhe nuances of a complex past cannot be reduced to tales of goodies and baddies