The Unity of History Everything is history. The fact that I write these lines is part of history. It is probably a very unimportant part, but it is a good example to show that everything that was done, written, said, and even existed until this very moment is part of the past and so it is part of history. If a child is born and increases the already top heavy demographic picture, it is certainly history; even a very important part of it. If the same child will die of starvation in a few years, it will be also part of history, even if it will not be screened on TV. According to the principle of the lines above, and using modern descriptions, history is an 'imaginary database' containing data of everything that makes up history. There are a number of factors, which should be highlighted in order to make the concept more understandable: When a concept of 'imaginary or virtual database' is used, it really means that objective study of history can only be done, if historical data would be used, not in a form of summary, but as a correct replica of the event. The optimal way of looking at the past, and understanding it without subjective distortion, would be to sit at a ringside seat and view the events directly, seeing but unseen. Of course, it is a stuff that science fiction stories are made of, so the idea should be quickly dismissed. The next best solution would be if every action, in whatever form it was and whether it originated from human or extra-human sources, would have a direct reflection and not as part of a summary. Alas, such a solution is also beyond our reach, certainly for the past and the present, and also for any foreseeable future. Probably, it can never be achieved because of technical, conceptual and even on moral grounds. Knowing and recording each human action which might affect future history, which means every possible action, sounds very much like part of 1984, with Big Brother watching over you. This too, should be assigned either to the bin of science fiction or to the bin of political horror stories. Despite the objections above, there is no escape the wish that such a solution would be technically, conceptually and morally feasible and possible. We should assume that there is some miraculous storage device that contains all the details of past history. As the search for historical data is usually done on the axis of time, it is assumed that such an 'imaginary database' is chronologically organized, and each day adds its data to it. The elements of that 'imaginary database', called human history, should contain, therefore whatever people said, did, thought, consumed or wanted to consume but could not because of lack of money or lack of food; as well the contents of each actual and imaginary archives. However, there is no database that is capable of storing untold billions of data elements for one day alone, and there is no conceivable system which would allow definitions of concepts, actions, customs, religious rites, etc. which should be the main headings of such a database that would fit all languages and all concepts, leading across all civilizations and cultures. Despite the fact that the creation and maintenance of such a database is impossible, on technical, conceptual and even on moral, grounds, every study of history acts as if such a database would be in existence; if not in details than at least in summaries Books of history are usually analyzed summaries of summaries of past events. Whatever we have of past history are written records, which are summaries of past events. It is very rare that historian can work on primary documents, as such documents exists only in comparably modern times. This is what causes history to be an art and not a science. For all of those who are not aware of the terminology of the philosophy of sciences, science means that whenever an experiment is performed, the result of the experiment should always have identical results, disregarding the time, the space or the performer of the experiment. Two plus two must always result in four, whoever is making the calculation and wherever it is made. Art is different. Painting an identical landscape by a number of artists will result in as many different pictures asere are artists. The same with historians too. As most of their analysis and synthesis is usually done by incomplete data, the historian has to complete the missing parts. This sometimes results in very good art, but more often in dull or indifferent mental exercises. But then, indifferent artists usually outnumber good artists. It should be understood here that whenever the essay refers to 'virtual or imaginary database of historical data' it does not mean that such a database exists in any format. The real meaning is of knowledge historians have about the past in whatever format that knowledge is. It is assumed that each day increases that knowledge, 'the imaginary database' by whatever it was recorded for that day, in newspapers, other media outlets, archives, etc. Knowing well the limitations of our knowledge about the past, it is also assumed that the 'virtual database' will always be incomplete, and new additions will almost never be subjective. If it is correct that activities made by humans or on humans by outside factors are the material of which the study of history is created, and there is indeed a collection of such data, or at least a theoretical acceptance of the existence of such a collection, then it should be obvious that there is no real difference between the contents of the imaginary database of one day and another. If there are differences, then they are either the results of random noise in the system, or data about events that refer to previous records in the database, or activities of extra-human origins. So, the contents of today's collection should include everything that happened today, part of them are connected to previous events. If among the data, which was recorded in the past, there was an eruption of a volcano, then today's collection will contain the details of the damage and the victims. Apart of changes caused by the data itself, there should be continuity within the database, except in cases when events occurred that were caused by extra-human factors. Earthquakes, hurricanes, typhoons, tornadoes, meteor showers, plagues, etc. are certainly factors that affect history but were not caused by humans. Here a few words are to be said about sudden human actions. Protest marches, revolutions, etc. are events, which usually come suddenly, but there are usually forerunners to such events. Shortages of food, price raises, unpopular taxes, deterioration of economic conditions, losses in wars, etc. are usually events, which come before some form of popular discontent. Thus, sudden and random events that occur in history are very rare indeed. They are usually continuations of processes that started much before and there are many signs announcing their arrival. So, there is a database in which all data concerning humanity is stored (in an imaginary way) and the contents of that database are constant, apart of the daily increase and apart of the exceptions explained above. In this case, there can be no checkpoints and no dividing lines. The meaning of the sentence is that there is one history, it is the history of the human race and it is a continuous process, without a beginning and without an end. Whatever changes occurred in the database, which is history itself, they should be self-explanatory as they were caused by events whose data is included in the same database. Polybius, the Greek historian, wrote in the 2nd century BC that if one writes history then better leave the gods out of it. He meant that everything could be explained by divine intervention but if you want to know the truth, look for the real cause. The previous sentence claimed that the continuous process, what we call history (or that imaginary database) has no beginning and no end. Why it should have no end is obvious. Each day a new set of data is accrued and is attached to the data previously accumulated. But why no beginning? It is a difficult question and it is difficult to give a convincing answer. Something without beginning and without end sounds like a variation of 'perpetuum mobile'. Moreover, it is a logical impossibility. The process 'without beginning' should be modified to: "the beginning of the imaginary database should be the earliest date whose entries can give explanation to currently valid data within the database." In translation to simple language, it means that all elements which have effects on any part of the database should be an integral part of the database itself, provided that the validated part of the data was valid within historical times. This is the theory I call: "the Unity of History". The exact wording of the theory is: "The imaginary database of historical data should include the originating cause of all subsequent event, which have relevance for recorded history, except for events originating in extra-human, natural causes." This sentence means that the beginning of the database should be at the earliest date whose events are affecting our present or our recent lives. We must allow for the fact that modern life might have atrophied many of those cultural customs, which were with us only a short while ago, so the effect should be on events from the beginning of recorded history, and not on the present alone. In order to reduce the scope of the 'imaginary database', the creation of the earth and life on it should be removed from the database. It is obvious that without them there would not be life on earth, therefore, no human history either. However, there is still a very long way to go before reaching the beginning. To show the possible extents, two examples are brought here. Before detailing the examples, there is a warning here. The second example shows one of the important parts of human behavior and it proves that it is the same as with other groups of mammals, having a gregarious social structure. As humans are mammals and have a gregarious social structure, it is correctly assumed that both have a common biological command. It is easy to prove that the behavior is the most advantageous as far as genetic survival is concerned. However, humans have a long existence as thinking animals. It is possible that the biological command underwent modifications during the long years of prehistoric existence. We only assume that there were modifications as there are no archaeological discoveries that would prove it, and no existing prehistoric human societies around, where we could see the results of the modifications. The present word is teeming with animal societies having a gregarious social structure so we have to remain with the biological command as the only one that we can prove scientifically. The first example is that of the commonly known fact that Europe has a preferred climatic treatment because of the warming effects of the Gulf Stream. Without it, Europe's temperature would be like the territories on comparable latitudes in Canada; much colder than it is today. It is a known fact, that the geographical factor which initiated the heat-exchange process, called the Gulf Stream, started at about two and a half million years ago, when the island of South America moved north and joined North America by the connecting territory of Central America. It closed the previous heat-exchange process that passed through the still open Isthmus of Panama. The changed global geography started a cycle of cold-hot periods, with longer cold periods, the Ice Ages, and shorter warm periods. Europe has received a preferential climatic treatment in the past 10 -12000 years, which is the last warm period. Part of it is what we know as the period of literal history. We know well, that it is a temporary period, just as the cold period following it will also be temporary. It did not happen in historical times yet, but if it will happen, it will also be related to that event two and a half million years ago, when the Isthmus of Panama was closed. There is no doubt that there is a tremendous historical importance to those simple geographical changes as was explained above. Indeed, it is difficult to imagine, what would have happened if the Isthmus of Panama would remain open. The preferential climatic treatment of Europe is only one of the smaller results of that closure. A much more important result of that closure is the increase of the size of the human brain from the size of 350-400 cc. on the average before the closure to 1500 cc today. There are scholars who attribute that increase to the need to find answers in a constantly changing world, between cold and warm. So if no geographical change then there is no preferential treatment of Europe, but then there would be no need for it as humanity would continue wandering around the African Savannah, happy and content with its brain of 350 cc. The second example is not so spectacular as the first one; there are no swimming continents and no constantly changing cold and warm periods. There is only a simple defense mechanism, developed by a group of mammals to defend themselves against enemies, much better equipped with teeth, claws, speed and strength than they themselves were. We look at our TV screens and are shocked to see young boys, sometimes not tall enough to hold a gun, strutting around with rifles, machetes and machine guns; seemingly enjoying themselves very much. They might have been pressed into service, but probably not much pressure was needed. Then we look at nearer and more civilized areas and see that armies now and at all times in history were comprised by young males. Sometimes it was by draft, sometimes they were volunteers or pressed into service by law or by force, but they had one common line: they were always young males above the age of puberty and below the age when people usually established families of their own. It was so everywhere and in every period of history. There are no real signs that those adolescents, as a group, ever contemplated to refuse the service. It is possible that in modern times there are spoiled kids who attempt to wriggle out of service, but even they do not say that instead of them the old people should be used. At the most they say, that they should be excused and other young people should be used. It is possible that the peace movements and the various mothers' organizations dislike wars and military service in general, but their sons do not usually share their dislike. According to van Creveld, for every man who served in a war and became pacifist for life, there is another one who glorifies the memory of his war service, and bores his descendants by the stories of his exploits in war, properly embellished, of course. There must be some natural course to bring all this about. Zoologists explain that species with gregarious social structure, and living in dangerous areas, like herds of bovines in open savannah, developed a defense mechanism that proved to be useful. They have a picket line of young males formed around the center of the herd, which contains the mothers and their young offspring. This is true for the bovines and the primates too. According to descriptions of the life of troops of baboons on the open savannah, the African leopards constantly prowl around the troop waiting for opportunity to kill and eat any of the troop. The young male baboons are constantly on the perimeter of the troop, watching for the attack of the leopards. Their duty is to warn the troop in time and attract the predator until the troop can flee to safety. According to zoologists, about 80 % of the young males are killed in this way. Luckily, the surviving 20 % is sufficient to provide for the continuation of the species. Humans are gregarious animals and have the same instincts as the primates. The main question is whether the behavior of young males in human society has any connection to the behavior of young males in animal society. It is not only a question of military service, it is also a question of street gangs, terror groups or any other organization which involves heavy physical efforts and a great measure of danger. In order to prove such a point it is not sufficient that there is a similarity. After all, military service for young males does not have to be connected to animal instincts. Viewing it in a logical way, the group of young males, after puberty and before family creation, is the most suitable for heavy physical effort, which war conditions demand, and they are the most expendable members of society. Neither old people, nor women and children are suitable for the effort, nor older men who have responsibilities that the young male have not. There should be some additional proof to accept the thesis. The First World War overshadowed the history of the 20th century. It was a true watershed; after the war nothing was the same as before it. The Second World War, with its unprecedented slaughter of civilians, Fascism and Communism, were all logical outcomes of that war. Indeed, it is only logical that eventually the two wars will be merged into one, and the period between 1914 to 1945 will be known as the second Thirty Years War. The direct cause of the war is well known; it was the assassination of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo. However, there is a near consensus that the assassination was merely the trigger and not the real cause. Since the end of the war, historians are searching for the real cause of the war; each proposing his pet ideas: German expansionism, commercial rivalry, a system of treaties which had to bring a crisis, tight war plans which demanded instant solution, and others, they were all nominated. There is one more possible cause of the war, which although noted by some of the historians, but not accepted by them as it was outside their frame of reference. This essay thinks that although all the causes listed above were correct, they missed the point as far as the real cause. The real cause of the war was that there was 44 years since the last European war, and it was a comparably limited affair, the German-French war in 1870, and it was nearly a century after the end of the last all-European conflagration, the Napoleonic Wars. Indeed, between the Napoleonic Wars and the First World War, there were limited wars in Europe, mainly connected with the unification of Italy and Germany. There are historians, who blamed the politicians of both sides for not avoiding the war, but in reality, the politicians were the only people who had some foreboding of the coming catastrophe, but they were powerless to stop the avalanche of general jubilation, which demanded a war. There were many comparable crises in European politics, which were at least as powerful as the assassination in Sarajevo, and did not lead to war. The crisis in 1878 was solved without war. Historians praise the commonsense of Bismarck and Disraeli in defusing the crisis, but probably the main reason of the peace was that there was no popular outcry to demand war. Rupert Brooke wrote in 1914: "Now God be thanked who has matched us with the hour… to turn as swimmers into cleanness leaping Glad from a world grown old and cold and weary." The meaning is clear. The long peace made the world old and cold, it is time to clean it. Rupert Brooke was not alone. Stefan Zweig welcomed the war in Austria, Thomas Mann in Germany and Romain Rolland in France. It was the urge of the biological imperative that demanded the war. One has only to view contemporary pictures or newsreels, showing jubilant youngsters milling around, shouting and demanding action; any action. It was the scene in Paris, Berlin, Wien, London, and even in St. Petersburg. People were behaving like they were going to a spring festival and not to the most murderous war in recorded history. There are some who explain that behavior by not knowing the coming horror of industrialized war. It was certainly true, although the Franco-German war of 1870 was already in that direction, but even if they would have known it, the 100 years since the last general war would have dimmed the picture. The outbreak of the First World War was not the only one that was obliquely caused by the pressure of the young. At the beginning of the Revolutionary wars in France there was not less enthusiasm than at the beginning of the First World War. Then it was Wordsworth and not Rupert Brooke who was overjoyed by the prospect of change: "Bliss was it in that dawn to be alive But to be young was very heaven." Not only English poets were susceptible. Goethe welcomed the republican victory at Valmy, Hegel saw in the defeat at Iena the beginning of a new era for mankind, and even skeptic Beethoven was caught for a time in the general enthusiasm of the young. The difference between the opening years of the general European conflagrations was about 120 years. After about 60 years, half of the total time span, there was a general European uprising, led by the young, students and intellectuals. The first was in 1848, exactly 56 years after the beginning of the first conflagration. The second was in 1968, 54 years after the second. It is an interesting coincidence, it certainly would be interesting to watch its return. However, the third event is too far away to wait for it. The third conflagration is much nearer in time. Two examples were brought here to illustrate how far back in time the imaginary database should reach, and also what disciplines are to be included in that database, apart of history and archaeology, to be able to answer important questions. The two subjects, which were presented here, the preferential climatic treatment of Europe and the biological foundations of warfare, are probably more important in human history than anything attributed to human beings. There are other important questions and all of them trace their roots to similar origins. However, they are unanswerable by the efforts of conventional historians, as the disciplines that hold the answers are outside their frame of reference. There is a second problem in the study of history as it is practiced today. It is one of the axioms of historians that history starts with the establishment of literate societies. The reason of this axiom is that historians can base their thesis only on documents. According to this principle, history started at about 3500 BC, with the beginning of literal societies, about 5500 years ago. In addition to this starting point, history is divided into three parts:.
There are also other divisions too, but this is the most commonplace. There were probably a number of factors that created this division.
|
