History reveals itself through itself. Prof. Noble suggest that the listener imagine that they build a time machine and travel back in time to question where the epoch in history will go from that point onward without knowing the sequel, and the listener must always see that point in history through itself but realize that what often follows is not what would have been expected.
For example, the participants of the Reformation, circa 1517, never would have seen themselves as ‘a reformation’ at that point in time. They would not have initially seen themselves as transforming the world’s understanding of itself. Erasmus came first and planted seeds of humanist thought, the Netherlands was stepping away from the Habsburg Empire’s yoke or soon would be, the ‘meaning’ of a simple placing of a ’95 Theses’ on the Wittenburg Castle church was understood on that Halloween as only as far as the nail that placed it on the wall and at best would lead to a lively discussion on topics mostly centered around indulgences. Luther has no idea what it would ‘mean’ or that it would lead to a Bible written in the German vernacular by Luther ultimately leading to a uniting of Germany through a common language based culture but not yet a united Germany itself and then a 30 year war (1619 – 1649) splintering Europe and turning Germany into a battleground which will take Germany 100 years to recover from allowing England and France to exert hegemony beyond their fiefdoms and so on. The meaning of the past as it happened through today’s eyes gets filtered by what the participants thought about themselves as they experienced their happenings through what they believed their world had been telling them previously.
History reveals itself through itself and it gives us the necessary wisdom to understand when it is presented as intelligently as these lectures do. Prof. Noble mentioned that our understanding of love of wisdom moved from a grammar to logic to rhetoric for the understanding of philosophy, roughly a pre-scholastic (grammar) to scholastic (Peter Lombard, Peter Abelard, St. Thomas Aquinas, logic) to a renaissance (Florence, Dante and Petrarch, rhetoric). Of course, during each period they never understood themselves in those terms and all of these concepts and thinkers are presented with greater details in multiple lectures.
I can’t build a time machine and I don’t want to go back to a time period that did not have indoor plumbing, but I do want to understand history in order to understand the meaning of today. I have no idea why some of the other reviewers seem to think this lecture was too simple. The Professor tells his story by way of a factical consideration while fitting his narrative into a ‘big history’ framework. I never grow tired about learning about my place in the universe thus leading to an uncovering of meaning for myself, and I think the approach the professor uses is the most appropriate for that purpose.
To understand who we are today and where we might be going, one first must understand the foundations that explain our building blocks. I do not need names of kings, or wars or bridges fought over or places I never heard of in lands that I know almost nothing about in order to understand history correctly. I need to understand the threads that make us who we are today woven in such a way that I can give meaning to what is happening today by understanding the foundations that brought us here.