11 Feb 2017

Great Man Theory of History

The Great Man Theory of History is that history can be largely explained by the impact of "great men" and the occasional "great woman". Examples would be that Hitler caused the Second World War and that Rosa Parks sparked off the Civil Rights movement by sitting on a bus.

The Great Man Theory was popularized in the 1840s by Thomas Carlyle who said "history is the biography of great men" (see footnote).

But in 1860 Herbert Spencer counter-argued that such great men are the products of their society and time. That led to the theory that history is shaped instead by "Vast Impersonal Forces", T. S. Eliot's phrase. In turn, this was attacked by Prof Karl Popper and Sir Isaiah Berlin.

The best account of this to and fro, 'historicism' by name, that I know is in What is History? by E. H. Carr, especially pages 44-50 in the Pelican 1961 edition and pages 104-105 (where Carr lampoons the view of Popper and Berlin).

Carr's synthesis is, I think, that history is made by individuals in their millions and that does not mean the individuals are impersonal:
Carlyle's and Lenin's millions were millions of individuals: there was nothing impersonal about them. Discussions of this question sometimes confuse anonymity with impersonality.  [p50] 
Thus we have, what I would summarize as a succession of Theories of History, which have been based on VIPs, VIFs and VAIs, (the last being Vast Anonymous Individuals).


This post was my response to MLK’s Daughter Just Took Out Trump On Facebook, when Bernice King (daughter of Coretta Scott King and Martin Luther King) advised on how to deal with the man in the Oval Office thus (my edit):
  • Don’t use his name 
  • Remember this is a regime and he’s not acting alone 
  • Focus on his policies, not his orange-ness and mental state 
  • Keep your message positive

Footnote on Thomas Carlyle: According to Faversham Stoa, a top Google hit on the subject, the Great Man Theory was popularized by Thomas Carlyle. But in What is History? p49. Carr, after quoting Carlyle as above, elaborates with another quotation to state the opposite!

No comments:

Post a Comment