In an 2007 article Elizabeth Cole wrote that “history is still to some extent a missing piece in the planning for transitional justice processes”. This statement surprises for several reasons. History, both as an academic discipline or in its broader sense, seems to hold an obvious value for the field of Transitional Justice (TJ). To look at past cases and see what policies have (not) achieved the desired effects seems unavoidable for any kind of efficient policy evaluation. Many post conflict societies today struggle with questions on the intergenerational consequences of certain policies, on the long-lived effects of the sequencing of measures or how and when certain challenges recur. The broad temporal space is precisely what is oft en lacking in policy evaluation. Many key works in the field are explicitly historical in their approach. The work of sociologist Luc Huyse, this project's initiator, is a prime example. The two volumes edited by Neil J. Kritz offer national historical case studies, not unlike the ones presented in this volume, while the report edited by C.M. Carlos also uses a systematic comparative framework of historical European cases. Jon Elster explicitly writes in his reference work Closing the Books: “The main task of this book is to discuss why processes of transitional justice have taken different forms in different transitions and why they have sometimes been absent altogether”. Comparative pattern seeking – sometimes labelled “transitology” – or longer term outcome evaluation by definition needs a historical dimension. Truth and Reconciliation Commissions (TRCs) and memorial policies (commemorations) are today considered essential parts of the TJ toolkit. Increasingly, historians are engaged as experts in different types of “truth finding” initiatives.

Nevertheless, Cole's statement rings true. Although in her article, she specifically referred to the absence of history education as a part of the TJ field, her analysis is transferable to the historic profession (from now on, “history” in this introduction refers to the profession and academic discipline). Arguably the most essential developments of the TJ field in the last decades have been its remarkably successful interdisciplinarity – law, sociology, political sciences, anthropology, psychology – and its integration of many different angles (democratisation, legal approaches, victim reparation etc.).