Ralph Waldo Emerson’s “History” is a meditation on humanity’s history really serving as the biography of one man. This is another essay from Emerson’s First Series published in 1841, wherein he is seeking to establish himself as a writer and thinker.
In “History,” Emerson essentially gives a nutshell version of his philosophy. Transcendentalism posits that all of humanity is really composed of many people making up one eternal and universal man. The account of history is then, the story of this one man, in his learnings and growth over the centuries. Emerson and the Transcendentalists believe that every person possesses a piece of the Divine, and at some future point, this will result in a Utopian society. This school of thinking is an offshoot of the Unitarian church, wherein Emerson was ordained. However, there are several major differences between Emerson’s thought and church doctrine, which prompted him to resign from ministry and leave the church.
Emerson rejects the rational cause and effect system of Empiricism, with the criticism that it leaves no room for freewill. Instead, Emerson argues that humanity can transcend the physical, material world by communing independently with nature.
He opens with an original poem illustrating his theory then proceeds to detail his perspective,
“We, as we read, must become Greeks, Romans, Turks, priest and king, martyr and executioner; must fasten these images to some reality in our secret experience, or we shall learn nothing rightly….All history becomes subjective; in other words there is properly no history, only biography.”
Emerson looks at history as the story of one universal man, learning and evolving over the course of human history. Hence his view of biography rather than ‘history’. The past is only our collective past, and the future is collective, as well. Emerson’s position is we all are connected and have a piece of eternity in us, and when all these pieces are combined, the true, universal Man, in tune with the spiritual and natural world, will emerge.
If we accept Emerson’s premise that we are all interconnected, the concept of thinking with a long-term perspective becomes imperative. This means that we consider out actions, values, laws, and customs with an eye to how they will affect our future, both physically and psychologically.
I personally view human history in an admittedly less transcendent way, though not too far removed. History as biography does make sense in the perspective that we are all alike. We all have the same basic human needs, and we want the same things; to have our physical needs met, and be able to realize more psychological and emotional achievement over the years. We are connected to those who lived centuries before us; we simply have better technology and a more complete understanding of how our planet and its systems work. Humans centuries from now, presumably, will have an even more complete understanding as our species continues to test, explore, and learn. With this broader perspective, it is easy to see the common thread of humanity traced down through the centuries, and easier to reconcile Emerson’s theory.
“I have no expectation that any man will read history aright who thinks that what was done in a remote age, by men whose names have resounded far, has any deeper sense than what he is doing today. ”
There are several layers of meaning to unwrap in this quote. First, Emerson, illustrating his notoriety as an invariable champion of independent thought, shows just how strongly he views the importance of living out our principles everyday; our lives today are just as critical as those of the heroes of old. Things done long ago were done in conviction at the time. This is the same way we should live today; with conviction and in embodiment of our values.
Secondly, this quote touches on the danger of viewing the past through modern perspectives, of imposing the present upon the past – an inability to understand why and how those decisions were made. This is to reject the opportunity of allowing the past to inform the future and instead choosing to walk forward in ignorance. Distantly removed actions and events will appear bizarre to a modern perspective; this is part of the challenge and reward in learning about such events and people. Further, this underscores the need to prioritize educating ourselves on the sweeping changes we’ve observed through history. However if we are to learn, as Emerson encourages us, we must be able to adopt the perspective of the people involved; we need to look at these things like they did if we hope to learn from them.
A good first step would be to do some research in order to have background information, and understand the context in which this piece of art or literature, etc, was created. We need to ask questions. What was going on in the country at the time? What is the artist’s economic background (this can tell us much about their life, especially during certain times in certain places). What was the conversation at the time, and what is this piece contributing to that discussion?
This also means that we don’t view past actions or ideas through the modern sense of morality. We need to be able to adopt another perspective; to look at the world and circumstances through the eyes of someone present at the time, and reason as they would. This is the only way we can actually learn from history. Knowing the outcomes is not enough. We need to be able to see why leaders made the decisions they did, and how they justified them, so that when we encounter a similar situation, we can respond appropriately.
With the understanding that Emerson was sharing his unique perspective of the world, and humanity’s place in it, we can still find wider truth in his exhortations. Doing the work to understand historical texts in context is the only way to really benefit from the information they hold. It’s not enough to know the facts, dates, and events; we need to understand why decisions were made, and how they influenced those involved. Memorizing is not the same as understanding; memorizing simply takes a bit of time and rote repetition. Understanding comes from reviewing, accommodating information, expressing it in your own words, and digging in for context and confirmation. Understanding becomes part of your own framework for viewing the world, bringing knowledge and significance to your decisions.
“Time dissipates to shining either the solid angularity of facts. No anchor, no cable, no fences avail to keep a fact a fact.”
Emerson touches on how illusive facts can be and their propensity to change from one age to the next. Things which were true at one time, may no longer be true. A fact from one era can erode and be replaced by new facts.
Shane Parrish at Farnam Street blog has written recently on this condition in “The Half-Life of Facts.” In his article, Parrish talks about how scientific facts are always subject to change, as we live in a time where information can be observed, verified, and released with such unprecedented speed. This makes it likely that as we receive new information, older facts will be rendered obsolete and no longer be considered true. Where Emerson takes a bird’s eye view of history, Parrish details practical and contemporary instances where the half-life of facts can render disaster. In either instance, understanding that knowledge and facts exist, like nature, in a state of flux can help us understand that learning is an abiding part of life.
Emerson posits that the aforementioned ages of human history correspond the lifetime of men, explicitly stating,
“The world exists for the education of each man. There is no age or state of society or mode of action in history to which there is not somewhat corresponding in his life.”
“The beautiful fables of the Greeks, being proper creations of the imagination and not of the fancy, are universal verities.”
One might think Emerson was referencing what Carl Jung later described as archetypes; recurring motifs which appear in stories across cultures. Examples of Jungian archetypes include the hero, the wise old man, the maiden, mother, father, trickster, initiation, etc. While Jung is describing characteristic patterns of individuals’ behavior appearing frequently in art and literature, Emerson is very literally speaking about all of humanity being part of the same, single ‘universal man’. Emerson’s view of humanity is therefore quite different from Carl Jung’s archetypes. While Jung looked at Greek myths, Scripture, and folk tales as variations on themes, Emerson views these different expressions as facets of the personality of a single, enduring man. For Jung, Hercules, Jesus, and Superman all represent the theme of a Savior for mankind. For Emerson, these men are all pieces of a personality of the enduring man.
This concept of the universal man is the source of Emerson’s steadfast optimism for humanity, and the reason he urges his audience to look inside themselves and determine to follow their passion and intuition over cultural norms. He is imploring his reader to find that spark of divinity and be led by that in their daily interactions.
“How many are the acts of one man in which we recognize the same character!”
Finally, Emerson compares history with nature; each reflect many iterations of the same few laws. To illustrate his point, Emerson looks briefly at the Greek culture, walking us through how literature, architecture , sculpture, and civil history, while all separate endeavors, are all composed with the same character of the same people, making them a cohesive collection. We recognize enduring themes and truths though they take different forms. Fittingly, a generation later, Mark Twain would observe this pattern in a quote attributed to him, “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it does rhyme.”
Emerson’s final paragraph asserts his steadfast urging that the way to real lasting wisdom and insight isn’t through books and studying, but through experience and living life with our own hands, eyes, and ears. This would become one of the key tenets of Emerson’s thought and legacy, as we’ve explored before.
Final Thoughts
In “History” we see Emerson’s theory of a universal mind, a central tenet to Transcendentalism. This view informs the joy and celebration Emerson finds in every individual, and motivates his desire and urge to view and bring out the best in every person. Whether we agree with Emerson’s specific theories or not, the undeniable need to learn from the past, and to continue to encourage ourselves and our fellow man to live a principled, thoughtful life remains timely as ever.
