History’s guide to human nature

What have we learned from tens of thousands of years of living on the planet?

Human history, by Midjourney.

When I was in high school in Rome, Italy, about 45 years ago, I had a teacher of both history and philosophy, Enrica Chiaromonte. She made philosophy come alive every week, so much so that I came this close to enrolling in the philosophy major at university, rather than biology. Indeed, she is partially responsible for my later switch from science to philosophy, though unfortunately I did not get to tell her that, since she died a few months before I published my first book of philosophy for the general public, which I had sent her as a present.

Anyway, Enrica—as we all called her—was often mad at me because although I always had top grades in philosophy, I barely made the passing mark for history. When she asked me why, I simply responded that I found philosophy to be exhilarating and interesting but regarded history as one of the most boring and tiresome subject matters ever.

I was wrong, wrong, wrong, but it took me a few years to realize it. And when I did, the first thing I devoted myself to was reading the high school history textbook that Enrica had adopted for our class. It was a delight.

All of this to tell you that it seems to me we could, and should, learn a thing or two from history. Accordingly, George Santayana wrote, in his 1905 The Life of Reason, that “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it,” though my favorite variation on the basic idea is “those who know history are condemned to see others repeat it.”

How, exactly, do we learn from history? Surely one way is to look at its entire span and see if we can pick up on patterns that reveal something useful about human nature and how we consequently behave. Which is the rather ambitious scope of this essay, though by necessity I will have to limit myself to a small number of examples. (If you’d like an expanded, systematic, and quantitative look at this, check a couple of books written by my University of Connecticut colleague Peter Turchin.)

Human behavior across global civilizations reveals striking consistencies that transcend culture, geography, and time period. Archaeological evidence spanning 95,000 years and documented behavior from Chinese dynasties to Australian Aboriginal societies to West African empires shows that certain patterns appear to be fundamentally wired into human nature, regardless of stated ideals or philosophical systems. Let’s take a look at some of the most general findings.

I. Hierarchies all the way

One of the most consistent findings across all civilizations is that humans spontaneously create hierarchical social structures, even when explicit ideology opposes hierarchy. Surprisingly, archaeological evidence from hunter-gatherer societies traditionally considered “egalitarian” reveals subtle but persistent status differences based on age, skill, and social connections.

For example, Australian Aboriginal societies, despite having no formal chiefs, consistently developed authority structures around elder knowledge and ritual expertise. Among the BaYaka foragers of northern Congo, variations in the structure of social networks directly correlates with differential access to cooperation (so-called relational wealth), creating de facto hierarchies that have effects on the biological fitness of individuals. Even in the famously egalitarian society of Çatalhöyük (7500-5600 BCE), burial practices and household organization suggest emerging social distinctions.

The pattern accelerates dramatically with agricultural surplus and urbanization. For instance, Islamic civilizations integrated diverse populations through religious identity while at the same time maintaining clear social hierarchies. And Indigenous American empires like the Inca developed sophisticated hierarchical systems despite communal resource-sharing ideologies.

All of the above suggests that the formation of hierarchies serves fundamental human needs for organization, decision-making efficiency, and resource allocation, at least in societies that developed after the Neolithic revolution, if not earlier. Rather than being imposed from above, hierarchies appear to emerge organically from human social dynamics, with leadership gravitating toward those with greater knowledge, age, social connections, or specialized skills. This shouldn’t be surprising given that our closest evolutionary relatives, the chimpanzees and the bonobos, also feature hierarchical structures in their groups (albeit implemented differently in the two species).

II. Capable of both cooperation and cruelty

Historical analysis of plagues, famines, natural disasters, and wars reveals predictable dual responses that appear across all civilizations. Crises simultaneously trigger extraordinary mutual aid and devastating scapegoating, often within the same communities.

During the Black Death (1346-1353), European communities experienced both unprecedented acts of heroism—with individuals risking death to care for strangers—and systematic persecution of Jewish populations, with 350 massacres destroying 60 major communities. Similarly, Hurricane Katrina demonstrated both an “armada of boat owners” (the so-called Cajun Navy) conducting civilian rescues and fear-based abandonment of vulnerable populations.

This duality appears universal across cultures and time periods. The Plague of Athens (430-426 BCE) saw both complete breakdown of social customs and emergence of new forms of community care. Islamic societies during medieval plagues showed organized communal response through religious leadership while also experiencing economic disruption and social fragmentation. Chinese famines historically triggered both extensive family support networks and reports of moral breakdown including abandonment of children.

Archaeological evidence from sites like Cahokia shows this pattern extending deep into history and even prehistory, with the same civilization demonstrating sophisticated cooperation in monument construction alongside evidence of mass sacrifice and defensive fortifications suggesting warfare. The capacity for both altruism and cruelty appears to be simultaneously present in human nature, activated by different circumstances rather than representing separate personality types.

Cahokia as it may have looked at its peak 1050–1350 AD. Image from Wikimedia, CC license.

III. In-group vs out-groups

Cross-cultural research reveals that all human societies develop systematic ways of distinguishing “us” from “them,” with remarkably consistent behavioral consequences. Moreover, brain imaging shows differential processing of in-group versus out-group faces at the neurological level, suggesting deep evolutionary roots for this pattern.

In-groups across cultures are consistently perceived as conventionally moral and caring, while out-groups are viewed as hedonistic and threatening. This pattern appears in Australian Aboriginal territorial systems, West African age-grade societies, Chinese clan organizations (formed by immigrants based on shared ancestry, region, or surname), the concept of Islamic ummah (collective community of believers), and Indigenous American tribal confederations. The specific boundaries of group identity vary dramatically by culture, but the psychological mechanisms remain constant.

Archaeological evidence shows the concept of “stranger” emerging in the Middle Pleistocene, with elaborate protocols for managing encounters with outsiders. Pacific Islander cultures developed sophisticated navigation guilds while maintaining strict boundaries between island communities. African empires created complex tributary relationships that preserved local identity within larger imperial structures.

The consequences follow predictable patterns: enhanced cooperation and resource sharing within groups, increased suspicion and potential hostility toward outsiders, systematic advantages in resource allocation favoring group members, and rapid mobilization for collective action when group identity is threatened. This dynamic drove both the extensive trade networks connecting ancient Mesopotamia to the Indus Valley and the scapegoating of minorities during medieval European plagues.

IV. Power always corrupts

Historical analyses reveal consistent patterns of moral decay among ruling elites across dramatically different political systems, cultures, and time periods. The pattern appears regardless of the initial ideology or structure. Islamic caliphates, despite religious foundations emphasizing justice and equality, consistently developed court corruption and administrative decay over generations. Japanese feudal systems showed similar tendencies toward elite withdrawal from practical governance during prosperous periods. European monarchies demonstrated similar patterns of increasing distance from subjects and focus on court intrigue rather than effective administration.

Even revolutionary movements (e.g., the Russian one) follow this trajectory and archaeological evidence suggests similar patterns in ancient civilizations: initial periods of effective organization and public works followed by increasing inequality and elite consumption at the expense of broader populations. Maya city-states show archaeological signatures of this pattern, with elite compounds growing larger and more elaborate while common housing showed signs of declining nutrition and increased warfare.

The consistency suggests that power concentration itself, rather than particular cultural or political systems, creates predictable behavioral changes. Distance from immediate consequences (though there are exceptions, remember Marie Antoinette’s famous “let them eat cake”…), reduced feedback from affected populations, and competition for status within elite circles appear to drive similar behavioral patterns across vastly different societies.

V. Adaptation to environmental change. Or not

Cross-cultural analysis reveals sophisticated environmental adaptation strategies that appear independently across isolated civilizations. Pacific Islander societies developed complex navigation systems enabling migration across thousands of miles of ocean. Australian Aboriginal societies maintained sustainable resource management across 65,000 years using detailed environmental knowledge and seasonal movement patterns. Andean civilizations created agricultural terracing systems that supported dense populations in challenging mountain environments.

The behavioral patterns underlying these adaptations show remarkable consistency. All societies develop detailed environmental knowledge transmitted through oral traditions, flexible social organization enabling rapid response to resource changes, reciprocal sharing systems reducing individual risk during scarcity, and migration patterns connecting communities across large geographic areas.