A famous phrase with a caveat
The Italian expression «corsi e ricorsi storici» is widely used to summarize one part of Giambattista Vico's thought. According to the Treccani encyclopedia, however, he did not formulate that exact phrase. In the New Science he examined the course of nations and the recurrence of forms of civic life. Presenting the familiar wording as a literal quotation from Vico would be misleading.
We often say that history repeats itself when a crisis or a political decision resembles an earlier one. That may be a useful starting point for research. A similar headline cannot tell us that the outcome will be the same.
What can return?
Vico's view, as summarized by Treccani, concerns analogous historical forms rather than the repetition of individual events. Institutions, technology and social relations change. Some mechanisms can nevertheless look familiar.
Two energy crises may both involve scarce supply while differing in fuel mix, import dependence, available substitutes and government responses. Recurrence is a question to investigate, not a fixed script.
How we use the idea
We start with a precise question about a present event: what resource is affected, where, for how long and why? We then seek earlier episodes with comparable characteristics. For each resemblance, we also show what differs, the accessible sources and the historical outcome.
Our first tool compares six energy episodes against stated criteria. It ranks similarities; it does not assign the probability of history repeating. A forecast would also require current evidence, tests against past cases and a stated deadline for judging its outcome.
An example
The 1973 oil shock and Europe's 2022 energy crisis are frequently compared. The International Energy Agency notes that the 2022 crisis involved all fossil fuels, whereas the 1970s shocks were mainly about oil. The similarity makes comparison useful; the difference prevents a mechanical transfer of outcomes.
For this project, historical cycles mean returning to sources to understand the present while clearly separating what we know from what we propose.