Summary
Tolstoy steps back from his story to tackle a big question: How do we really understand what makes history happen? He argues that historians—both ancient and modern—have been getting it wrong. Ancient historians said God chose certain leaders to carry out divine plans. Modern historians reject that idea but still fall into the same trap: they focus on individual 'great men' like Napoleon and claim these heroes shaped entire nations through their genius or character flaws. Tolstoy shows how ridiculous this sounds by summarizing the Napoleonic Wars in the voice of a typical historian: 'Napoleon was a genius who killed lots of people, then he wasn't, then he was again, then he died.' The real problem, Tolstoy argues, is that historians are answering questions nobody asked. When we want to understand massive historical movements—why millions of people suddenly started killing each other across Europe—pointing to one man's personality traits doesn't actually explain anything. It's like a deaf person responding to the wrong conversation. Tolstoy is building toward his own theory about what really drives historical change, and it's not great men making great decisions. This chapter matters because it teaches us to spot when experts are giving us non-answers to important questions—a skill that applies far beyond history books.
Coming Up in Chapter 355
Tolstoy will continue dismantling traditional historical thinking and start revealing his own radical theory about what actually moves nations and shapes human events.
Share it with friends
An excerpt from the original text.(~500 words)
History is the life of nations and of humanity. To seize and put into words, to describe directly the life of humanity or even of a single nation, appears impossible. The ancient historians all employed one and the same method to describe and seize the apparently elusive—the life of a people. They described the activity of individuals who ruled the people, and regarded the activity of those men as representing the activity of the whole nation. The question: how did individuals make nations act as they wished and by what was the will of these individuals themselves guided? the ancients met by recognizing a divinity which subjected the nations to the will of a chosen man, and guided the will of that chosen man so as to accomplish ends that were predestined. For the ancients these questions were solved by a belief in the direct participation of the Deity in human affairs. Modern history, in theory, rejects both these principles. It would seem that having rejected the belief of the ancients in man’s subjection to the Deity and in a predetermined aim toward which nations are led, modern history should study not the manifestations of power but the causes that produce it. But modern history has not done this. Having in theory rejected the view held by the ancients, it still follows them in practice. Instead of men endowed with divine authority and directly guided by the will of God, modern history has given us either heroes endowed with extraordinary, superhuman capacities, or simply men of very various kinds, from monarchs to journalists, who lead the masses. Instead of the former divinely appointed aims of the Jewish, Greek, or Roman nations, which ancient historians regarded as representing the progress of humanity, modern history has postulated its own aims—the welfare of the French, German, or English people, or, in its highest abstraction, the welfare and civilization of humanity in general, by which is usually meant that of the peoples occupying a small northwesterly portion of a large continent. Modern history has rejected the beliefs of the ancients without replacing them by a new conception, and the logic of the situation has obliged the historians, after they had apparently rejected the divine authority of the kings and the “fate” of the ancients, to reach the same conclusion by another road, that is, to recognize (1) nations guided by individual men, and (2) the existence of a known aim to which these nations and humanity at large are tending. At the basis of the works of all the modern historians from Gibbon to Buckle, despite their seeming disagreements and the apparent novelty of their outlooks, lie those two old, unavoidable assumptions. In the first place the historian describes the activity of individuals who in his opinion have directed humanity (one historian considers only monarchs, generals, and ministers as being such men, while another includes also orators, learned men, reformers, philosophers, and poets). Secondly, it is assumed that the goal toward which humanity is...
Master this chapter. Complete your experience
Purchase the complete book to access all chapters and support classic literature
As an Amazon Associate, we earn a small commission from qualifying purchases at no additional cost to you.
Available in paperback, hardcover, and e-book formats
Intelligence Amplifier™ Analysis
The Road of Expert Non-Answers - When Authority Dodges the Real Question
When experts give elaborate explanations that sound impressive but don't actually answer the question asked.
Why This Matters
Connect literature to life
This chapter teaches how to recognize when authority figures avoid hard questions by confidently discussing easier topics instead.
Practice This Today
This week, notice when experts on TV or in meetings answer different questions than what was asked—then try asking 'But how does that address the original question?'
Now let's explore the literary elements.
Terms to Know
Great Man Theory
The idea that history is shaped by exceptional individuals—kings, generals, heroes—who change the world through their personal genius or character. Ancient historians said God chose these leaders; modern historians just call them naturally gifted.
Modern Usage:
We still do this when we credit Steve Jobs alone for Apple's success or blame one CEO for a company's entire failure.
Historical Causation
The question of what actually causes big historical events to happen. Do wars start because one leader decides to invade, or are there deeper forces at work that make conflict inevitable?
Modern Usage:
Like asking whether the 2008 financial crisis happened because of a few greedy bankers or because of systemic problems in how our economy works.
Divine Providence
The ancient belief that God directly controls human affairs and chooses certain people to carry out divine plans. Kings and conquerors succeeded because heaven willed it.
Modern Usage:
Similar to how some people say 'everything happens for a reason' or that successful people were 'meant to be' leaders.
Historical Methodology
The way historians approach studying the past—what questions they ask and what evidence they consider important. Tolstoy argues most historians ask the wrong questions entirely.
Modern Usage:
Like how news coverage focuses on which politician said what instead of examining the economic forces that actually drive policy decisions.
Collective Action
When millions of people all start doing the same thing at once—like going to war, migrating, or changing their beliefs. The puzzle is how this coordination happens without central planning.
Modern Usage:
Think of how social media trends spread, or how entire industries suddenly shift direction, seemingly without anyone being in charge.
Napoleonic Wars
A series of conflicts from 1803-1815 where Napoleon's France fought against various European coalitions. These wars reshaped the entire continent and killed millions.
Modern Usage:
The closest modern equivalent might be how World War II changed global power structures and affected every family in participating countries.
Characters in This Chapter
Napoleon
Historical figure used as example
Tolstoy uses Napoleon as the perfect example of how historians get it wrong. They explain the entire Napoleonic era by pointing to one man's personality—he was brilliant, then he wasn't, then he died.
Modern Equivalent:
The celebrity CEO who gets credit for everything good and blame for everything bad at their company
Key Quotes & Analysis
"History is the life of nations and of humanity."
Context: Tolstoy opens his philosophical discussion by defining what history actually is
This sets up Tolstoy's argument that real history isn't about individual leaders but about the collective experience of entire peoples. He's saying historians should study how societies actually live and change.
In Today's Words:
History is about how whole groups of people actually lived their lives, not just the famous people we remember.
"To seize and put into words, to describe directly the life of humanity or even of a single nation, appears impossible."
Context: Tolstoy acknowledges the fundamental challenge historians face
He's admitting that understanding how entire societies work is incredibly difficult. This sets up his critique—since it's so hard, historians take shortcuts by focusing on individual leaders instead.
In Today's Words:
It's basically impossible to capture how an entire country or all of humanity really works and changes over time.
"Instead of men endowed with divine authority and directly guided by the will of God, modern history has given us either heroes endowed with exceptional qualities."
Context: Tolstoy explains how modern historians replaced divine authority with natural genius
This reveals how little has actually changed in historical thinking. Modern historians just swapped 'God chose Napoleon' for 'Napoleon was naturally brilliant'—but they're still reducing complex events to one person's traits.
In Today's Words:
Modern historians stopped saying 'God made Napoleon special' and started saying 'Napoleon was just naturally amazing'—but it's the same basic mistake.
Thematic Threads
Authority
In This Chapter
Tolstoy challenges historians' authority by showing their explanations don't actually explain anything
Development
Expanding from military/social authority to intellectual authority
In Your Life:
You see this when doctors, bosses, or officials give you complex-sounding responses that leave your real question unanswered
Truth
In This Chapter
The difference between sounding knowledgeable and actually providing understanding
Development
Building on earlier themes about self-deception to include institutional deception
In Your Life:
You encounter this when institutions use impressive language to hide the fact they don't have real answers
Power
In This Chapter
How intellectual authority maintains itself by avoiding questions it can't answer
Development
Connecting to earlier exploration of how power structures protect themselves
In Your Life:
You experience this when experts use their credentials to shut down your legitimate questions
Class
In This Chapter
The educated class creates barriers through language that obscures rather than clarifies
Development
Deepening the theme of how class differences are maintained through communication
In Your Life:
You see this when professionals use jargon to make you feel stupid for asking basic questions
You now have the context. Time to form your own thoughts.
Discussion Questions
- 1
According to Tolstoy, what's the main problem with how historians explain major events like wars?
analysis • surface - 2
Why does Tolstoy compare historians to deaf people responding to the wrong conversation?
analysis • medium - 3
Think about a time when you asked an expert a direct question but got a confusing or irrelevant answer. What was really happening in that exchange?
application • medium - 4
When someone in authority gives you a non-answer, what's your best strategy for getting the information you actually need?
application • deep - 5
What does this chapter reveal about the difference between sounding smart and actually being helpful?
reflection • deep
Critical Thinking Exercise
Decode the Expert Non-Answer
Think of a recent interaction where you asked someone in authority (doctor, boss, teacher, government official) a direct question but left feeling confused or unsatisfied. Write down your original question, their response, and what question they actually answered instead of yours. Then practice rewriting your question in a way that would be harder to deflect.
Consider:
- •Notice when responses include impressive jargon but don't address your core concern
- •Pay attention to whether they're explaining what happened or why it happened
- •Consider whether their expertise actually covers the question you're asking
Journaling Prompt
Write about a time when you caught yourself giving a non-answer to avoid admitting you didn't know something. What were you protecting, and what would have happened if you'd just said 'I don't know'?
Coming Up Next...
Chapter 355: The Problem with Historical Explanations
In the next chapter, you'll discover different experts can tell completely opposite stories about the same events, and learn simple explanations for complex problems usually miss the mark. These insights reveal timeless patterns that resonate in our own lives and relationships.