The odd thing about history, or anything one learns about, is the recursiveness of it all. The more you learn, the more questions you have, the more study and dissemination required. If one is motivated enough to seek such answers in any definable, empirical and useful way; then one must dive deeply and fully in order to gain applicable intellectual agency. Combining most if not all of the forms and features of liberal arts, defining history contextually is dependent on understanding the perspective and experiences of those of the era. The experiences and decisions of the people really make the difference. The people, the human condition, human experience; that is history. Technology, doctrine and governmental structure are auxiliary elements and forces. Providing the immutable boundaries of the past, though not wholly or contextually defining it. The eras and ages will be greatly redefined, in time, to accommodate new data and evidence. That is the beauty of history: its depth and fungibility within its empirical permanence. As we learn more, experience more as a people, history is altered. We are all part of it and impacted by it, history is, essentially and literally, what we make it and how it is subsequently interpreted. This goes as much for our modern and future generations, as it did for those we see below and behind us on the timeline of human evolution. We have developed colloquialism, epics and monuments to ourselves; our societies and our achievements: with the foresight that someone, will someday be peering in from the future to the past; utilizing the last standing bits of our present from which to gauge our empirical and greater historical worth -- measuring such against the whole human history.
So as we look back: we must be careful to remember that history was, in fact and in scripture, mindfully shaped and altered by those who lived within it; with the knowledge and intention of creating a legacy, or caring for one. This is not to say that every action and event is a carefully crafted scenario with an intent to deceive, that there doesn’t exist raw and unfettered truth in ancient text, to suggest that each element is a member of a larger class of propaganda (though clearly evident), or to otherwise persuade one that historical allegories have no empirical worth; though this is an acknowledgement that facts and truth are not all that history contains. An acknowledgement that there are indeed solipsistic virtues, values and narratives peppered throughout historical pericope. And a further acknowledgement that we must be cognizant of context and motivation, above and beyond the facts laid out on the surface; in order to gain proper and useful insight. Like making tactical decisions within the “fog of war”; we must create and rely on moral and ethical boundaries, syllogisms, and a nonsolipsistic sense of personal and cultural detachment: in order to ethically and empirically weigh past events.
Religion is essentially a construct of social and common law. Taking the nature of man and reforming them into a subclass of human, more able to live and work toward prolific culture in close proximity. Religion, in one form or another, has been instrumental in social life. Whether it be in the Ma’at of egypt and it provincial standard from which much of their personal and municipal laws and codes (as well as other civilizations and religions) were constructed; or be it, Christianity and Islam, in the Empire of Charlemagne and the progression of trade and education which resulted: religion, of some type and structure, has been a base on which many, if not all, empires have been built. As much as it pains me personally, we must admit the great and pervasive influence of the Christian church has had, specifically with in terms of Western Culture, in its many incarnations. Religion often lead to the formation of social structure, and the retention of the same. At each point in history there is an, however unique, approach to mysticism and/or spirituality as a means of connecting the mind and hearts of the populous to the goals and social construct demanded or needed at the time; as well as being used as an explanation of the perpetually unexplainable. We could, and often do, encapsulate this as nationalism; or compartmentalize it, with other separate and more specific facets of society and belief; though, religion, and more acutely belief: is certainly a pervasive construct -- and surely is, what has been, the central uniting factor throughout many -- if not, in some abstract way, all -- of the great civilizations of the West. Without “religion” (and transference of tradition in a larger and more mechanistic sense), neither Eastern or Western, culture or society would exist.
There must be a starting point for law and order; an authority. As such, there must be a sense of, and mechanistic agency for: authority. Hence, we have religion, in its many forms and cultural abstractions. For reasons far to various and in depth to state here, the social structure needs an authority to have a moral base (likely the same path from which Hobbes arrives at the nature of man; and Machiavelli arrived at the importance of state facilitated education, structure and social-culture (ie. nationalism)). Whether that be “God”, “Science”, Humanism or fear through tyrannical rule: people need structure and defined set of values, to live together - “peaceably”. I think we would like to believe we are nondeterministic, rational beings; though I fear that is far less the case than most will ever be willing or able to admit. People can “worship” anything. I think it less important what they “worshiped”, but that they “worship” something. Providing a moral and ethical base from which life can be based, and policy and culture argued -- and ultimately progressed. Evidenced by the sheer amount and variation in religion; which basically have the same morality -- though they may disagree in procedure and petence, tradition and observances. There is not a particularly “significant” difference in any two religions one compares; more likely is there being several collisions of thoughts, ideals and practices; which, I think, speaks far more to how alike we are as a species; independent of geographical, social, or idolic influences.
Food, however, is what actually takes us to the next plane of enlightenment. Provides the ability to foster: religion, social identity, nationalism, science, trade, education, etc. A stable and robust food source is central to settlement (among other, similar, geographic elements). Because it is central to life, food enables us to grow both literally and intellectually. Settlement precedes trade and supplements personal energy output with the collective. Trade is crucial to growth.
Growth facilities industry, organically mandating education and common law. Education is central to social and intellectual progression. Settlement and education facilitate creativity and a move away from mysticism and theistic spirituality, not by choice but as a reflection of need and stage of cultural-development. Leading empires to a more humanistic view, progressing cultures into more emotive and representational art, normally progressing to an assertion of further personal and social rights. In each case, total enlightenment seems close at hand, at least to the less educated or historically versed among the observing populace. Then, as if scripted; through war, disease, revolt, economic disaster, or general social progression which culminates in reform (though usually through civil war): the reset button is hit. Progressing us to the next iteration of these same events. Sliding back into a rebuilding stage, where concepts and traditions are rebuilt through the acquisition of intellectual blocks of knowledge from the past-- just as society post Rome used the literal and figurative building blocks of the empire from which to build a new. And once again the journey starts where it left off. Delivering us back to the “dark ages” from which to climb out again, refreshed and recreated; reeducated and reaffirmed in belief.
Only through hermeneutics, ethical scholarship, and ethical politic: can we be delivered from the “evil” of man, of our “human nature”. There is no positive and definitive way from which to secure our future and avoid continually repeating our past: conceptually -- or literally, in the worst case. This is as much a theme of the movie “War Games” as it is within the epic of human history. We create and we destroy, only to recreate and declare our new foundations infallible, unassailable and indestructible. We continually learn the same lessons, only for another generation to recreate the same paradigm within a different context and set of ideals; whether they be geographically separate or simply separated by time. So I rationalize this as the job of the historian: to inform the future of our past. Through careful and precise dissemination of events, proper contextualization of the present, and the effect had on the present by the ancient and recent past: informing the future of the mistakes they are currently making and those they will undoubtedly recreate. The historian does this with hindsight, foresight and with the hope that the next iteration of the world will be better, more informed, less painful, and kinder than the last.
