How often DOES history repeat?

We all know the saying that “he who does not study the past is doomed to repeat it”. I thought about this, and only one example springs to mind (Hitler invading russia despite Napoleon’s having demonstrated why one shouldn’t). Of course, I haven’t studied history in depth. Am I simply uninformed in this regard? Are there many other examples that prove this saying?

Sure. The military tends to provide the most examples, and military tacticians study past battles carefully so as not to duplicate past errors of others.

However, as another example: In recent times (last twenty years of so), when one of the Latin American countries faced high inflation, they would often put exchange controls in effect, prohibiting people from taking money out of the country. It was clear (from economic theory, as well as from the example of countless other similar efforts) that such restrictions only worsened the economy and din’t help, but that didn’t stop the next country from repeating the effort.

Not only does history repeat itself, it also mumbles.

At the same time, people who study history too closely end up making even worse errors because they assume history repeats.

The classic example was French military thinking. After they lost the Franco-Prussian war becuase they let themselves be beseiged, the French military decided that defensive strategy was a big mistake, and formulated the philiosophy of “attack a l’outrance.” So when WWI rolled around, their strategy involved charging directly into machine gun fire. They managed to win WWI, but learned their “lesson” – a defensive strategy was best. So they built the Maginot Line.

The U.S. military’s experience in WWII colored our actions in Vietnam, too.

History never repeats. Conditions are occasionally similar enough that a study of the past gives you a guide, but you always have to take into consideration the differences, too.

I think that the answer is that “history repeats” in a broad sense, but that specific instances do not recur. Things like the parallel between Napoleon’s invasion of Russia and Hitler’s ( I learned that one as a kid, too) are really flukes.

What amazes me is that we generally don’t appreciate it because people, in general DON’T KNOW ENOUGH HISTORY! I’m not talking about the people who show up on Jay Leno’s “Jaywalking”, who don’t know when the Civil War took place, or who commanded the American forces at Yorktown – I mean people like Me, who think they know history.

I reread Machiavelli’s “The Prince” a while back. Machiavelli draws examples from the mistakes of the past and also from the successful actions of the past. The thing is I never even heard of most of the rulers he mentions – and he dredeges examples from recent (to him Italian history and from the ancient world. It made me realize that I am ill-equipped to try and draw lessons from history, because in spite of the wealth of information available I really don’t know much of it. Military tacticians as noted above in this thread) DO study the past in detail, and so do political scientists and historians. Most of the rest of us just don’t have the background. I feel the lack, and I’ve been published in history magazines.

…twice: once as tragedy, once as farce.

Karl “Party Boy” Marx

Wasn’t this question asked befroe? :smiley:

Battle of Crecy:

French cavalry forces, dressed in full armor, march into the bogs of western Flanders to meet the infantry and archery forces of Englands King Edward III. They are soundly crushed, despite an aproximately 8-to-1 manpower advantage over the English. Basicly, the English infantry lured the French Cavalry into the bogs, and when they got stuck in the marsh, english longbowmen on hills surrounding the area mowed down the french cavalry. They were trapped. It was thought that this battle should have been the end of the Mounted Knight in battle…

Fastforward a century to…:

Battle of Agincourt:

Repeat the above text word for word, except replace the name “Edward III” with “Henry V”. Thankfully, this battle, along with the more widespread use of the Pike by Swiss forces (and now others) put an end to the Mounted Knight as a successful soldier.