That the was the theme of an engaging discussion I attended on Saturday morning at the annual meeting of law professors in Washington, D.C. This four-hour marathon panel featured two living academic legends, Jack Balkin (Yale) and Randy Barnett (Georgetown), who addressed an important theoretical and practical question: How should history inform the study, practice, and interpretation of law? Since most of my own scholarly work of late has been historical in nature, including “Coase’s Parable” (2023), “Adam Smith through the Eyes of Horace Walpole” (2022), “Adam Smith in Love” (2021), “Guaranteed Income: Chronicle of a Political Death Foretold” (2020), and “Domestic Constitutional Violence” (2019), I just had to attend this panel, and as it happens, Professors Balkin and Barnett did not disappoint. They presented two competing but compelling theories of legal history. Alas, I have to catch a flight back home, but rest assured I will compare and contrast their approaches to legal history in my next post.