Stanford historian uncovers a grim correlation between violence and inequality over the millennia
Professor Walter Scheidel examines the history of peace and economic inequality over the past 10,000 years.
What price do we pay for civilization? For Walter Scheidel, a professor of history and classics at Stanford, civilization has come at the cost of glaring economic inequality since the Stone Age. The sole exception, in his account, is widespread violence – wars, pandemics, civil unrest; only violent shocks like these have substantially reduced inequality over the millennia.
“It is almost universally true that violence has been necessary to ensure the redistribution of wealth at any point in time,” said Scheidel, summarizing the thesis of The Great Leveler: Violence and the History of Inequality from the Stone Age to the Twenty-First Century, his newly published book.
Surveying long stretches of human history, Scheidel said that “the big equalizing moments in history may not have always had the same cause, but they shared one common root: massive and violent disruptions of the established order.”
This idea is connected to Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the Twenty-First Century (2013), a New York Times bestseller Scheidel admires. Piketty found that “inequality does not go down by itself because we have economic development,” Scheidel said. “His book covers only 200 years and argues that only violent intervention can make that happen.”
But Scheidel, who has taught a freshman seminar on long-term inequality, wanted to know if this insight can be applied to all of history. He enlisted the help of Andrew Granato, a senior majoring in economics, to compile a bibliography of more than 1,000 titles. The result is a sweeping narrative about the link between inequality and peace that harkens back to the beginning of human civilization.
Formulating such a narrative is no simple task. The Great Leveler primarily relies on the published works of other historians – a challenge, in Scheidel’s view, of trying “to synthesize highly fragmented and specialized scholarship and create a single narrative.”
As an expert on ancient Rome, however, Scheidel is well aware that pre-modern sources are limited and some are invalid. His familiarity with scant ancient sources prepared him to grapple with an abundance of more reliable modern records.
“Looking at the distant past would have been more difficult for a modernist economist or historian,” said Scheidel, for whom it is “generally easier to deal with modern evidence because it is more familiar and thoroughly studied.”
A grim view
Scheidel acknowledges his pessimism about resolving inequality. “Reversing the trend toward greater concentrations of income, in the United States and across the world, might be, in fact, nearly impossible,” he said.
Among the wide variety of catastrophes that level societies, Scheidel identifies what he calls “four horsemen”: mass mobilization or state warfare, transformative revolution, state collapse and plague.
A textbook example of mass mobilization is World War II, a conflict that embroiled many developed countries and, key for Scheidel, “uniformly hugely reduced inequality.” As with Europe and Japan, he said, “in the U.S. there were massive tax increases, state intervention in the economy to support the war effort and increase output, which triggered a redistribution of resources, benefiting workers and harming the interests of the top 1 percent.”
Another “horseman” was the outbreak of the bubonic plague in 14th-century Eurasia. While war wreaks havoc on everything, a pandemic of this magnitude “kills a third of the population, but does not damage the physical infrastructure,” Scheidel said. “As a result, labor becomes scarce, wages grow and the gap between the rich and the poor narrows.”
But inequality ratcheted up the moment the plague subsided and the population began to increase. Soon, large swaths of society would see their benefits erased – a loss that in Scheidel’s account would be briefly reversed after the two world wars in the 20th century.
State collapse has also been crucial in the history of inequality. “The rich are beneficiaries of the state,” Scheidel said, adding that “if states fall apart, everybody is worse off; but the rich have more to lose. Their wealth is wiped out by the destruction of the state, such as in the fall of the Mayan civilization or Chinese dynasties.”
Is change possible?
As for whether reducing inequality will ever be possible in peacetime, Scheidel simply said, “History does not determine the future. Things can change, but change is slow.”
“Business as usual may not be enough,” he said. “We have to think harder about how to bring change in today’s world.”
A peaceful remedy to economic inequality may start with what Scheidel calls “an understanding of historical context, because simply electing the right politicians who promise that everything will be OK is a short-term view.”
For the longer term, Scheidel said, “I am not advocating war, but repeating the same old ideas ignores the lessons of history. Something truly innovative and original may have to happen in order to create lasting change.”
Media Contacts
Chris Kark, Director of Humanities Communications: (650) 724-8156, ckark@stanford.edu
This article was originally published in the Stanford Report on January 24, 2017.
For more information about this book, visit Princeton University Press.
In his talk, Moravcsik spoke about the four major crises currently facing the European Union and argued that these crises present less cause for concern than current discourse would suggest. The first crisis is Europe's purported decline in geopolitical power, particularly vis-à-vis China. Contrary to these claims, however, Moravcsik presented evidence indicating that the European Union outstrips China on various measures, including military spending, the number of combat and non-combat forces deployed abroad, number of aircraft carriers, number of allies, relative economic power, civilian foreign economic assistance, and its effective use of non-military intervention. The second crisis is one of Euroscepticism, as exemplified by Brexit. Moravcsik noted that the current British negotiating position largely reflects the status quo. Moreover, he is skeptical that the there will be a domino effect. Specifically, mainstream political parties are unlikely to call for a referendum on the EU, particularly given the results of the British vote, and that the anti-EU parties, even at their most successful, gain too little national political power to successfully hold a referendum. Migration constitutes the third crisis, and Moravcsik argues that this crisis is as serious as it is being portrayed. However, this crisis is unlikely to undermine the entire European project, as there is a clear and effective political solution - closing the border using fences, criminal law, and repatriation agreements. The final crisis is the lack of economic growth. Again, this crisis is exaggerated as both the EU-28 and the Eurozone have had higher per capita growth over the past decade than has the U.S. or Japan. However, that growth has been uneven across the EU member states and has been either stagnant or negative in countries such as Portugal and Greece. Moravcsik's ultimate take away was that in order to undo the European Union, a crisis must be serious and lacking a clear policy solution, and none of the four crises currently facing the EU meet both of these criteria.
In his research, Justin is interested in 19th and 20th century British and American literature, with a focus on sound studies, poetics, Victorianism, transatlantic modernism, periodicals, technology, and urbanization. In his dissertation Justin examines sound technology and poetry in Britain and America from 1816 to 1914. In one of his dissertation chapters, Justin focuses on the work of the little-known Irish poet, James Henry. Supported by The Europe Center, Justin traveled to Dublin in October 2016 in order to examine the only known repository of Henry's manuscripts, which is housed in the Trinity College archives. In addition to his work in the archives, Justin was able to meet with Emeritus Professor John Richmond, now in his nineties and housebound, who wrote the first Henry biography in 1976. His book is now extremely rare and prohibitively expensive, but he generously gave Justin a copy, which will be of great value for his continuing research. In addition to his work towards the chapter on Henry, Justin was able to advance the research for various other chapters of his dissertation by meeting with other scholars and visiting sites of historical importance. Justin plans to return to Trinity in order to finish cataloging Henry's papers.
Dirk is a historian who is interested in 20th century European history, Holocaust and Jewish studies, cultures and politics of memory, and intellectual and migration history. His current research focuses on developing an inclusive narrative of post-war Austrian history, one that reflects the current plurality and diversity of Austrian society. In order to do so, Dirk will be working primarily on two projects during his time at The Europe Center. In the first project, he is examining the so-called "guest worker“ migration to Austria during the 1960s and 1970s. Because labor migration was viewed as temporary, it somehow remained a blank spot in narratives of post-war Austrian history. But in fact, it has had a lasting effect on Austrian society. The migrants remain nonetheless invisible and have no voice in the discourse on the national history. Dirk seeks to uncover greater information and new sources in order to provide a more complete and multiperspective portrayal of contemporary Austrian history as both a European and global transnational history. In the second project, Dirk seeks to understand how museums can be used to present an inclusive historical narrative to the public. He will lead a group of Austrian museum curators and museologists on a tour of the historical museums in Washington, D.C. - including the National Museum of the American Indian and the National Museum of African American History and Culture - in order to observe how the U.S. presents the history of both minority and marginalized groups. As a member of the Advisory Board for the planned House of Austrian History in Vienna, Dirk intends for this work to facilitate a compelling and inclusive presentation of Austrian history. Please join us in welcoming Dirk to Stanford.
