{ } = word or expression can't be understood
{word} = hard to understand, might be this

After the last meeting, I was scolded by a friend, because I dallied. After all, he said, "Universal history is such a long story. So much has to be said, would you mention such ephemeral things as Time, Life, and Fortune?"

Well, I agree with his judgment, but--on -- on Time, Life, and Fortune--but the day is every -- all we have. And if I cannot get you out of this daily life of yours a little bit, I can't teach universal history.

Perhaps I may -- tell you a true anecdote from the First World War, where history really was made on the battlefields. It was at the Saloniki front, in Greece, that a friend of mine was stationed with an anti-flak battery. And he was an historian. And at headquarters of the army, they found out that they had a real historian. Of course, since he was in the army, he was a noncommissioned officer there.

And so the aide to the general -- to the commanding general came to see this bird who dared to be in uniform, and yet be a scholar. And -- or vice versa, I suppose. And -- and he said, "You are an historian?"

"Well, I'm called this," he said. "I've studied with some very good masters. And I'm going to be a professor of history. I planned this, at least."

"All right. Can you entertain us? We are bored stiff from this trench warfare for two years. We are lying here in these -- in this terrible country of the Balkans. And what can you offer?"

He said, "Anything. What do you want?"

"Well," he said, "Anything. What -- what can you do?"

"Well, I can teach world history."

"Well, for this we have no time. Could you --?"

"Oh," he said. "I can teach world history in one sentence, in one hour, and in a lifetime."

The aide was very baffled and said, "Show me how you do it in one sentence."

So he said. "All right. World history begins in the East and gradually and slowly moves west--even to California."

So it is one of the -- the facts that history can be said and told to many people in many ways. It has no such rules as in mathematics, or in a- -- the -- any of the visible arts. History is the way of introducing a man to the life of his -- the people. And I said to you, the real, hor- -- the horrible situation we face today is that you assume that you can be told history as you can be told "2 and 2 is 4." That unfortunately is impossible, because you must realize that in every minute as we stand here, history appeals to you as the younger of many people, as the older of many people, and as the contemporaries of other people. You are three people in one, as of this moment. Some things have to be told, because you are not as old as your grandparents. Some things have to be told, because you will be the grandparents of somebody. And some things have to be told so that you can sufficiently despise this man from Cupertino who asks for human sacrifice in the year of the Lord 1967, since allegedly -- despite the fact that allegedly with Christianity, human sacrifices have been abolished.

The last story, you remember, which I read to you from the paper, means that in the midst of us at this moment, there is crude paganism. You have paganism wherever there is human sacrifice. Where people are sacrificed for your benefit, there is human sacrifice. And this man in this shamelessness says there has to be, because otherwise his dividends go down.

So we have as of this moment not only three generations, but the whole history of mankind, because human history begins with sacrifice. And the question which you can ask in any universal history -- the true and the important question is: "Who is sacrificed or what is sacrificed to live on?" Most of you demand sacrifices. Think of your mothers. They are not human sac- -- sacrifices in the negative sense, because they are brought and given voluntarily. Christianity is the great story, you see, of the voluntary sacrifice in order to abolish involuntary sacrifices. That's the whole -- meaning of the Crucifixion. But sacrifices there are, or there is no history. Humanity cannot be held together without sacrifices. That's the law of history through all generations. Of course, Life, Fortune, and--what's the third?


--Time try to gloss over this. And -- this Mr. Jack {Slade} from Cupertino naively assumes that if other sacrif- -- are sacrificed, that's wonderful, you see, for the -- for the benefit of prosperity. He didn't even mention the Vietnam victims, you see.

So we have found one thing, that at this moment, in this hall, and in America and over the globe, there are people who live in different ages. There are pagans who live exactly under the same terms of -- as the Australian bushmen lived for the last 7,000 years. They demand human sacrifice for their own well-being. I would say one-third of the Americans share this. One-third don't admit it. And one-third defy it. But at this very moment, the so-called contemporaries of yours, ladies and gentlemen, are not your contemporaries in any real way. Because some of them are Stone Age Indians. Many.

I know a colleague of mine in Stanford -- at Stanford University. He calls himself a friend of President Eisenhower. He may be. And -- and he said to me that of course the 700 million Chinese had to -- wiped out right away, with the help of the bomb. He said this in cold blood. Quite a decent man. He has children; he has grandchildren. And he himself was -- is a refugee from Germany, who had to flee for his life from Hitler. And just the same, he can say this, that 700 million Chinese better are -- cease to exist.

Do you understand now, Mr. Lee, that I have to take my time? Where is he? Oh, he isn't here. That's the man who scolded me for not hurrying on. I cannot hurry on before I have made clear one thing: that history has very little to do for the mass of men with the year 1966. Most people I meet live 1500 B.C. It doesn't help them to -- to buy the San Francisco Chronicle. This date on the -- on the paper is not their date, you see. They have this big swindle today that people are up to date if they buy the newest newspaper. I don't see what this has to do with their soul, their black soul. The -- the paper can bear this date. What tells you that they, the readers, have anything to do with the year 1967?

But you all believe this. You are full of superstitions. You are much more superstitious than any Australian Negro. Because you do believe, and you have been told by these mass media, that by tuning in and by listening today, you live today. That's very doubtful. Simply by tuning in to these -- to these clowns, you do not live today. You live today if you belong to the Christian era. You belong to the Christian era if you admit that you cannot demand human sacrifices for your benefit. That any sacrifice that is made must be voluntary, and then is very miraculous. And the people who -- who bring these sacrifices must be -- must be worshiped, and must be -- respected, and must be included in your plan of life.

This is very simple. And of course the reason why universal history, you see, is in abeyance today--and why my friend Page Smith prefers to write two volumes on John Adams--is that he cannot be caught on this whole problem of the lack of temporality, you see. One -- in the last 60 years--and now I say this -- as you know, he's a great friend of mine, and I admire his book, and I bought two copies two days ago, so I cannot be held in contempt of court--but since

1890, since the end of Europe was obvious--it was obvious when -- when the crown prince of Austria-Hungary was murdered, and when Bismarck retired--that there would be a great world catastrophe. Nietzsche knew it all the time. In 1889, he already wrote this down.

So since 1889, the end of Europe was in sight, and the people who, from them on tried to dally away their time in the mountain -- Magic Mountain, because--that is the book on this period, by Thomas Mann--left the Christian era. They were in no time, of no time, knew no time. They declined--read Proust, read Thomas Mann, read any of the -- of the Amer- -- Englishmen; read Ezra Pound, or what have you--they are all quite resolved that their own generation alone can solve the riddles.

I think I told you last time the famous story of the French book in 1929, La Guerre, C'est Sont Nos PŠres. And -- the -- the war, the World War I to these Frenchmen in 1929, was their fathers' business. And so -- 12 years later, they were all prisoners of war in Germany, these same young men.

Anybody who wants to escape history, you see, can be sure that he is in a very, very, very disagreeable spot of prehistory. And that is the reason why I felt I should dwell on this Magic Mountain in which you all sit. I don't know, perhaps today you have to read -- to buy Look, because poor Mrs. Kennedy is in it. But whoever is in these papers is used up as cannon fodder for the battle against history, which the whole United States have resolved to deliver. By -- with the help of these elections, where you then prefer to elect Mr. Reagan, you swindle yourself out of real history. Elections are not history. But if you read, it's "agonizing," it's "historical event." If you read the Vokabels, the words, the terms used for the smallest event, you see, the -- the two frogs' contests, it is a secular event.

So that we are at this moment not only deprived of historical existence, gentlemen, but we are cheated into some other cloud of existence, which has nothing to do with history, but which prepares your downfall. It is obvious that if nothing is done against Jack {Slade} in Cupertino, with his -- sacrifices of 100 Americans a day, and no mentioning of the Vietnamese killed, that something terrible has happened to you and me. Because we are absolutely responsible for this man's writing.

I don't know what to do, but it's very serious; because if the state of California harbors a man of this ignominious character, and if he is allowed to say this, and to have it printed, and to have it read by you and me, then the sin against the Holy Spirit has been committed. And as you know, the Bible says rightly, the sin against the Holy Spirit cannot be forgiven. Either we all will be destroyed with this writer, or he has to be exiled, or -- pilloried, or something.

Without our doing something about it, you see--it is not the war, but it is this man's meaning that this war can be had, you see, for the boom--that you and I will be punished. And we can't complain. We have been told. There it is, in print. Have you done anything? No. Therefore that's Sodom and Gomorrah. Sodom and Gomorrah were not in any way more wicked than the United States. They were wonderful cities. They had a subway, I'm sure. And they had arc lights. And they had movies. And they were most agreeable cities, you see.

If -- in other words, let me sum up: what I have tried to say last time was that universal history is only had by those who are grateful to the point in history to which they belong. And the one iron rule, which we -- must take now into the second meeting is that human sacrifices, as -- belong to the -- pre-Christian era, that in Christ- -- in the Christian era, it is impossible to say, "Certain people have to be sacrificed," you see, as it was in the gospel, you see: "It is better that one man die than the whole nation goes astray." If you decline to -- { } this, I cannot teach you history. History only makes sense on the background of certain achievements. Certain things have been enacted. If you make them -- move them backward, you can of course go pagan. You can go Assyrian. You can go Jewish. You can go anything. But if you do, you must know that the history in which you have made the rank -- and joined Cowell College is destroyed. Cowell College rests here on the assumption that the Christian era makes sense, that Christoph Columbus discovered America at a certain point, Anno Domini, in the year of the Lord, you see. And that therefore, after the counting of the years of the Lord has been introduced, certain minima of behavior are established.

I gave you one of them, that speech and war are the two opposites in human life, that where there is speech, there doesn't have to be war. And where there is no speech, there must be war. People who are not on speaking terms must end in going to war, even if they have been -- just been silent for a long time, you see. You will always -- you will always learn that if people have been just not on speaking terms, the moment will come where they war against each other. You can have a minority in a village, and never talk to them; then the day comes when it shows that there is no village.

We had this case. In 1920, and -- to my village came some dozens of Ukrainian and Lithuanian workmen. There was a strike in -- in the neighborhood. And the factory workers were all from the European East, imported. And the family who owned this -- got fastidious and said, "We won't reopen the factory. The strike is too costly. And we can't deal with these men," and shut down.

And there were all these hundreds of people, and this -- out of work. And they moved into the back hills of my state of Vermont. And you find them there

to this day, their -- their -- their offspring. And not one of the churches in the town--of course, we have ample churches, and very pious people, ministers, et cetera--cared for them. They were Greek Orthodox, so how can a Protestant minister, or Roman Catholic minister speak to people who don't belong to their congregation? So they didn't. So these people were never integrated.

The first thing I -- I -- time I heard of this disintegration of our town was when I myself lived down there, and found that one of the children of this -- such a family committed suicide. That was some reason to get upset. And ever since, I have tried to convince my Catholic, and my Congregational, and my Episcopal ministers that it is their responsibility that these people should be made to join one of their churches. I said I don't care which. "But you have to go and tell them that you -- must make them welcome." They couldn't of course, you see. Denominations are sacred in America. Nothing happened. To this day, they don't belong. And that's -- after all, was in 1919.

That's how today the -- the communities in America die. And they fall into a -- not only an anarchical, but into a prehistorical state, because you must understand that these people--they are, by the way, practically very good people; much better than the citizens on Main Street. But the people on Main Street don't know it. And they don't want to find out that these are good people, you see. And therefore, this -- at this moment, in the last election, we found out that we had no town left, that it was just bandied around by machinations of a -- of a different sort outside the village.

And that's how in the small, New England towns, life has come to a complete frustration. If you ask me where these people, in which age they live, they certainly don't live in 1966 or '67; they don't live in 1750, or when -- we -- we were only founded in 1761. But they just vegetate.

Anything is possible, because they have no obligations to the people who live next door. And anybody who -- who doesn't love his neighbor as himself cannot be a human being. And these vestiges are everywhere, you see. Of course, when -- they -- I must also quote the positive side. Where the village is still functioning --, I was -- lost my wife. And for the next six weeks, my neighbors brought me the food for luncheon and dinner, in -- clandestinely put it on the kitchen table, and disappeared. That's the old way of life, you see. And so it co-exists today, in many strange manners.

But the idea of a pre-Christian order you find today mentioned in anthropology. But we only have to study anthropology so fervently, because among us, the anthropological phenomena, you see, are on the rise. That's the reason why we have to cope with those great times, when people founded families. That is a

prehistoric -- so-called prehistoric {craft}. That's what the anthropologists can tell us. That's why you need it, and I need it, to be told how families and communities are founded; because we can't.

So let me turn now to the order I propose to follow. Nobody can know everything in universal history, and I'm the last to pose as I was omniscient in this respect. I can only tell universal history in -- in spurts. I have studied a long time. I've written a universal history which is in the stacks now. I'm -- the book, I -- I have been told, is now in -- on reserve. Those of you who are able to read German, or find a friend who can read German, may perhaps do well to look at this book. It's called The Full Count of the Times. And you see, I have made an attempt to -- to give it a name which is more real than the word "universal history." The Full Count of the Times, and -- a thick book, and I'm sure you won't read it. But I recommend it highly. But since it is in German, and is only to be produced in English next year, I can't force you to study it, but who can -- knows German in this round? It's interesting. Well, I thought there would be 30; no, but -- there aren't. So. So, at least, a dozen righteous men can be safe from the { }.

The full count of the times. That is to say that the universal history consists of times, in the plural. And these times are definitely separated in their aim. Man has aimed at different times, at different goals. And you will find that there is a very beautiful order in the sequence in which men have done real things. Of course, I mean real things, and not just eaten ice cream. I say this, because I am asked now not to eat ice cream. So I want you to share this penalty.

The -- the seven ages of man are celebrated in the canonical hours. For any Catholic who reads the breviary, and cler- -- the priest does, you know, this -- because it is -- has been known, and only forgotten in the 20th century, that man has passed through seven ages. They are not mythical, and they are not thought out. They are much less mythical than Mrs. Henry Luce. But you believe that Mrs. Luce is not mythical. And therefore you cannot understand history.

The seven ages are the attempt to -- acknowledge man's position in the universe. And that's why I had to call this course "Universal History." But the universe offers different aspects at different times. You can speak of a physical universe--and that is Heaven and earth, the stars, you see. You can speak of the Church Universal, and that includes all souls. And therefore it goes from the Creci- -- Crucifixion to the institution of All Souls, the festival on November 2nd, which was for your pleasure instituted in 996, so that you can see it covers just the first thousand years of our era. Then there is a story -- history of physical nature, of the earth, of the -- Heaven and earth, of astronomy and geography. And that -- comes very handy with the occupation of Iceland by the Norwegians in -- around the year 1000, and the founding of Iceland, and then their going

further West, to our day, to the satellites and the Sputniks.

That's a very clear task. The last thousand years have discovered the world, and therefore people who have written history on a large scale in the last thousand years have called their books World History. Latin: historia mundi. And the history of the world is always the history of Heaven and earth in terms of astronomical, geographical knowledge, and acquaintance, and visitation. We shall see that this is only one way of looking at the universal history. You can live in universal history without so much geography, you see. You don't have to be a member of the -- of the Sierra Club.

These 2,000 years I think everybody has heard of. The first thousand years of our era, the history of the Church Universal; and the second, the story of the physical universe. The word "universe" there, as you see, occurs in two different forms. One, as a noun, "the universe," neutralized; and in the "Church Universal" as an adjective.

The next thousand years obviously will not have it -- anything to do with this boredom on the moon, but with our interesting fights with our races, and our families, and our continents, and our languages, and our religions. And therefore, however we call it, it will be a universe -- the Universal Society, which would be the better term than the Great Society, because probably people in the Universal Society will be just as small as we are. And the society itself cannot be called "great" therefore. That is -- would be to say that all Christians are Christians. I mean, the Church Universal does include the heretics, and does include the -- the non-Christians, you see. And therefore it's the same with the Great Society. Let's be modest and not speak of the next election slogan, the "Great Society"; but let's say the world of man has to be now separated from the world of Heaven and earth. The people, as we--sitting here--we are so disorganized that we must find some yardstick by which our passions, our endeavors make sense in a larger picture.

So the Universal Society I offer you--it's not the best term, but I don't -- think I should tell the whole story now--we will come to this at the end. But as you know, most historians begin somewhere and never go back over the second act in Shakespeare.

I -- I had a friend who was a Shakespeare professor. And he had an old alumnus come in to see him. And he stopped him on the road while I was walking with my friend. And my friend was a little put out. He didn't know this man -- didn't remember this alumnus. And he said, "What can I do for you?"

"Oh," he said. "You can tell me the end of Hamlet. We never got beyond

the fourth act."

So that's a little -- our situation, with the history of the next thousand years. We are in the act, but we won't see its end. Yet we -- you can feel, and you can know, and you must hold -- in order to combat human sacrifice, that if we now do not say again in society, "No human being can be sacrificed against his will," we have a very important point which is quite different from nat- -- the natural history of the last thousand years, and the scientific history of the world, you see, in which we have -- which we abound.

Today history is at the crossroads, because most students of history pursue still the endeavor of writing the history of Bulgaria, the history of California, the history of Nicaragua. All -- that is, all the histories that do not exist. I mean, California after all was created anti-historically, you see. It's a dream; it's a pipe dream; it's Hollywood. And that's why we have the governor. This is not reality in which you move.

This happens to any such undertaking. America, since the Greenlanders, has been a great endeavor, you see, adding to the real world one more piece, you see. But there comes the moment that if the United States now no longer speak in terms of the Great Society, as Mr. Johnson quite rightly has felt, they -- they fall into a pit -- oblivion. Where are they? Who are they?

So it's quite exciting that you have the privilege of holding at this moment, at the turning point of two historical conceptions of the universe. The conception on which I -- un- -- in which I grew up, and which I had to repudiate vehemently was that history was world history. And by "world," the five -- the six continents were meant, you see; and Heaven and earth; and our knowledgeability about all the races that lived there; the maps to be drawn, you see. And I was fascinated, but I never was satisfied. And very early in the game, when Nietzsche come -- prophesied the World War, which then came, I was -- became aware of the fact that the topic "world" for the name "history" did not suffice, that something different had to happen than a little in world history.

It is difficult for you to believe this, at this moment. May I give you an example? Here exists -- a man called {Quigley}. Has anybody heard his name? An historian. He has written a fat volume, Tragedy and Hope. That thick. And it's a solid book. It's a good book. He teaches history in the -- United States. And there is nothing to be said against the book, in itself. Only it's far from his mind that there could be a step beyond political history, beyond boundaries of people, you see, that there could be such a thing as the Great Society in which it makes -- the people in Chile and the people in Alaska may be much closer than the people in Alaska and in Canada. That's the indifference, you see, of a social history of

the universe, compared to a physical history of the universe.

However, this man called this book, Tragedy and Hope. And the two terms, "tragedy" and "hope," the two terms are taken from the Henry Luce vocabulary. That is, they take you as the judge of the matter, your hopes, you see, or what you call "tragedy" is giving the names to these events. They are -- quite disconnected. I have never found out in this book, which I have studied so that I am a little better prepared for my lecture here--I've never found out what he calls "tragedy" and what he calls "hope," you see. It's -- the two world wars that are in it, the last 60 years. And may I warn you? The terms "tragedy" and "hope" are this side of real history. Because history takes it for granted that -- men must die. And the problem of history is: how can mortal man survive his own death? Since we all die, all history would be just dust and nothingness.

And therefore the first beginning of our era, and the first beginning of the ancient era--of the tribe, and of the cities in -- in Greece--has been the proud victory over death. And there -- is there no tragedy? Tragedy means that the end is the end. And our era means that the end is the beginning. And you have to decide it. Mr. {Slade} has decided, you see, that the end is the end. These people are just killed. But the end is not the end. Because we dying people can do things by which we combat our own dying; and something more than we have been, remains.

So Tragedy and Hope by {Quigley} I recommend to you as a counter do- --how do you say?--an antidote against my lecture. If you want to have the orthodox, American view of the world, it consists of many disagreeable events called "tragedies," and then of the blatant hope that the stock exchange will go up tomorrow. That's hope. It's perfectly meaningless to me, to connect tragedy and hope. If there is tragedy, then there is no hope; if there is hope, then there is no tragedy. Hope -- in America you have it both ways. And in a German proverb, you say, you can't have the piece of cake -- the piece of pie and the dime for which you buy it. But this is -- in the modern world, seems to be possible.

Tragedy and Hope is a significant title. And I only want you to re- -- retain it in your mind, or in your notes, because we'll have to come back to this contradiction time and again. What people call "tragedy" and what they call "hope" is no food for history. History has nothing to do with hopes, and it has nothing to do with tragedies. It has very much to do with drama. It has very much to deal with lyrics. It has very much to do with epics. It has to do -- certainly with death and resurrection. And it has nothing to do with this lame, gluing-together of two things that remain outside. Either there is tragedy or there is hope.

And in order that you believe that I'm not ranting, but communicate to

you a very important source material for all history, may I tell you that the word "hope" is not found in the four Gospels of the New Testament? Jesus and His Apostles could live without hope. No American can do that, I know. But they were not Apostles. The word "hope" has to be eradicated from your vocabulary before you can become serious about history. If history consisted of hopes, you see, they would all go empty. Acts of faith make history. That Columbus did not hope to discover the United States, the America. But he discovered it as an act of faith. And the battle between faith and hope is the battle between a universe of physical entities and events, and a history of social events. And you all make -- are tempted today to fall into this abyss where hope and faith cannot to be distinguished. They are very much distinguished. Because faith does not see where it is going. And hope paints pictures about the in- -- increase in income next year.

This is serious business, because -- I would not address this to a European audience. But the American obsession is with hopes. And when I came to this country 40 years -- nearly -- 35 years ago, I had a great friend, Richard Cabot, who was a professor of medicine and of Christian ethics at Harvard University. He was quite interesting. He had two opposite chairs. And -- and he always said to me, "Eugen, you must understand, America is -- the country of hope."

You see. This is the outstanding feature which makes the Americans into Americans. And it is very important, but I am sorry to come at a moment where the Americans have to have the same faith as the Pilgrim fathers who did not come on hope. They came on faith. You cannot cross the ocean in 1608 or 1620, you see, with any hope. They arrived at Christmas time, you see, at 20 below. Hopeless.

So this is my connection with your existence here, that I, as a European, have to testify to you that when I landed in this country, I did not give up my faith. And I had no hopes whatsoever. I didn't know what could happen. And I had -- I was too old at that time to have any rosy hopes. I didn't want to discover a gold mine or anything, not --. And to live on faith, which the Pilgrim fathers did, and all the founders of the small communities, you see, is something quite different than to live on hope.

You know what it is -- how to live on hope? The Eskimos have a -- have a technique, you see. They have a -- a sleigh -- on which the pole is very long. And at the end of the pole, they attach a piece of meat. And then they -- they harness their dogs, you see, and they run -- run like wild after the piece of meat at the point, you see, at the outer point of the sleigh. And that's -- what we do: chase hopes, and never get the sausage.

If people cannot live on faith, they cannot live in history. Because our

own hopes have to be -- corrected, stand corrected. They are nice accompaniments. I mean, they are like the sponge which you -- the mercenary soldier offered to Jesus on the Cross. They -- they mitigate the pain of life, you see. As long as you have hopes, it's all not so bad. But that is not real. Any hopes that you entertain because you get drunk just -- will not produce effects. They are your own hopes. And they remain -- you remain in the prison of your own little brain. Hopes are too much of private property of -- to have any significance in the face of our creator, who is just in process of creating you, and in making you outgrow your hopes. I hope you will all be better people than what you now hope to be.

I have always found that the real, great people are not the people who get their hopes fulfilled. I pity them, who do this, you see. Why should your hopes be worth to be fulfilled? That's called the "self-made woman." Look at the people who get what they want. They are the most unhappy people in the world.

I have a friend who, for 30 years, has battled to become at the same time professor at Harvard and at Heidelberg, alternating. Half a year there, half a year there. For -- for personal reasons, biographical reasons which have to be respected. This was his pipe dream. That was the solution, you see, of his career. He was a very ambitious man. But if he could combine the two positions, you see, that would be the proof that he was a great man. Nothing else hampered him so much of becoming a great man than this plan, this dream. He has finally achieved it. And when the appointment was in the making, in Stuttgart, in Germany, for Heidelberg, his half- -- half-year professorship there, he came to me and said, "Eugen, how can I get out of it?"

I said, "You can't. You have invested 30 years of plotting. And --." Well, why do you laugh? Is it not tragic? That's tragedy and hope, you see. Our own hopes always produce a tragedy.

If he had waited and found out if he really should -- this. But he set out from the very first day. He had been a student in Heidelberg. He emigrated to this country, married a fine American woman, and so felt that America had his loyalty. He was a -- the -- the head of the student exchange, founded after the First World War. The story is quite significant. Only I warn you that a man who too well knows what he wants, usually at the end is quite empty. He gets what he wants. And then the end is -- is Rockefeller. What does it help a man to -- to get all this money, you see?

You know, when Rockefeller was nearly -- near his death, a man came to him, Mr. {Thompson}, and said, "Do you know, Mr. Rockefeller, that you are so far the most hated man in the United States?"

And he said, "Is that so? What can I do?"

"Oh," he said, "You can do very much. I'll teach you."

And the old man, I don't know -- he was already 90 or nearly 90, began to learn how to live, without such purposes, without such vain hopes, you see. And that's why you have today the Rockefeller Foundation. Because he unlearned his { }. This was no longer important that he wanted to be rich. And I assure you, it isn't important. But it's very important that this Mr. Thompson should have had the guts, you see, to convert this people -- person to a decent life.

So let's try to find a history which is not based on the hopes of the individuals who are in history, but on those people who sense what we are expected to achieve.

Now with regard to the present era, A.D., you will perhaps have no difficulty in believing that mankind has always known this, and that after all the Christian martyrs, and saints, and monks, and bishops, and -- and missionaries, et cetera, that they had a plan. And they went forward in a certain direction, and to a certain extent--except for -- for {Slade} in Cupertino--they have even succeeded.

And so in the Christian era, strangely enough--although my modern colleagues in history deny it fervently and vi- -- -hemently--there is continuity. People have for the last 2,000 years first set out to unify the gods, and -- so that all men knew there was one God, who came as man and tries to jo- -- make us join Him, so that mankind ceases to be a farce. And then secondly, that the world which God created around us is worth knowing, and offers better opportunities, if we know this together. You see it from the bomb. The bomb unites men now much more, you see, than the Bible, because the bomb has to be produced by so many thousand people, that their cooperation, you see, is a -- mighty weapon for peace.

This is world history. And before, it was church history. And as I said, now it will be social history, or something like it.

This is easy to understand. But if we go back before B.C., all the pagan remnants of your professors emerge. And at this moment, I think history is in a very bad way, because any meaning of the earlier history is denied. And universal history is not taught, because the only universal history that exists is found in the Old Testament, and the Old Testament is pooh-poohed, and "that's a -- a tribal religion," or whatever it is. It -- certainly it has nothing to do with the historical sciences."

Now I'm afraid that I have to be very simple and very old-fashioned. I have studied hieroglyphs; I have studied Egyptian; I have studied tribal law and tribal order for many, many years; and I have studied Greek and the classics. And I have not studied, but can't help reading, the Bible. And I find that the record is a very simple one, that we have four chapters before the beginning of our era, in which man followed one goal in four different manners. A universal history has been the aim of the earliest aborigines in Australia. I will prove it to you. And it still is. The universe--in German, that's the All, and I don't find in English an expression for "all," "the all," so I have to use the Latin word "universe," you see, to express this desire of the most primitive man to belong to the whole, to the all.

And it's -- therefore the first chapter is -- in the history which we are going to enter now -- next time, is the universe of the tribes. The universe of the tribes. And the outcome of this universe is the creation of parents. At the end of the story, it can go -- anywhere on the surface of the globe, you'll find that people know what it is to be a parent. They very often don't know what it is to be a child. But they do know what it is -- know what it is -- means to be a parent. And since you are unlearning this, with the help of so many divorces, it is very natural that we should come back to this creation of parenthood. The parents were created by tribes. Father and mother are tribal -- the -- great creations of tribes.

The second chapter is equally simple. It's the creation of priests, of Heaven and earth. The second chapter is this chapter of the great empires, and their conquest of a part of the world and this cosmic order. China, Egypt, Assur, Babylonia -- here, the Incas, the Yucatan. That's Number 2, as pre-Christian -- a pre-Christian millennium.

The next step is the creation of poets and philosophers. The history of Greece is an addition to tribal and em- -- empire history. We all g- -- read poetry. I hope you even write poetry. The all -- you all go to the theater. And anybody who goes into the theater comes -- hails from the Greeks.

And the third -- fourth story, which is in bad default today among us, but without which we will all perish, is the creation of prophets. Prophecy is a legitimate part of every human being.

A great German poetess, Ricarda Huch--H-u-c-h, whom I mention with great respect and reverence, wrote in 1946: "Deep down, every human being is prophetic." And I think you should take this as a cue for the fact that that has very little to do with denominations or religion. It's a fact of your an my equipment with the sense for the future. And if you don't have the sense, I pity you. Every human being has this; instead of having stupid hopes, he has a sense of

the prophetic. He knows, and you should know, that this man in Cupertino will bring down disaster on our -- our country, unless we do something about it. This is prophecy. Prophecy means that the present is not the mother of the future, but part of the present has to be wiped out, because otherwise we can't reach our future. Destiny has nothing to do with causation. Because half of the things around us will have to go, if we want to make peace, or live -- live fruitfully. It is not true that the present begets the future.

And this is perhaps the most important point, which is totally forgotten, which leads to such silly titles as Tragedy and Hope. I received an invitation for this class. And I want you to help me to ful- -- in -- accept this invitation. "To all faculty: please announce in your class the presentation of seven {Fineman} lecture films in physics this quarter." Who has listened to the first? Was it good?

(Very good.)

Na ja. Of course. He's a physicist. And -- on January 6th was "The Law of Gravitation." That's another word for "death." Yes, ma- -- gravitation is the fact that we all must die. It's just a more elegant expression.

"The Relation of Mathematics to Physics," "The Great Conservation Principles," "Symmetry and Physical Law," "The Distinction of Past and Future," "Probability and Uncertainty," "Seeking New Law." This takes place, as you well know, in this room, here. So that's the other half, so to speak, of your mind, which is invited to participate. I will -- will not inflict on you the demand to go to all these lectures. But I want you very much to go to the lecture on -- on January -- what is it? -- "The Distinction of Past and Future," I think that's February 2nd. Has anybody a list? Will you kindly take this down? It takes place here in the evening at 8 o'clock. And you can see how immensely important it is that the title is "The Distinction of Past and Future."

Now the physicist and the historian have absolutely opposite notions about past and future. Mr. Laplace, the great physicist, wrote in -- 1800 that the past and the present produce the future. And I of course hold against this the fact that the future and the past produce the present. You would not be here without your faith in the future. Why should you be here? And that's all nonsense, what these physicists claim, that the past and present can produce the future, because there is no present, except by your act of faith, sitting without getting nervous for 60 minutes, in -- or even 75, in this room, expecting the worst.

This is the greatest heresy of America, you see, your belief that the future is produced by the present. But the people who -- who want to -- who are in a hurry, and who want to believe in the future, all get neurotic, you see. The child

has a present, because it plays with such confidence, that the moment is enlarged to eternity. It plays on. It is not in a hurry. It has no -- no other thing but to reach the future -- protected, and dreaming, or singing, or laughing, or smiling, or making love. And this is very serious. The great opposition between the physicists and the metaphysicists, between the historian--{simpler said}--and the observer of facts, you see the factualist, the positivist--you can call him as you please, but always give him a bad name.

The -- there are two enemies. Either you say that the past and the present produce the future, and the result will be a Rolls Royce; or you believe that the future and the past will produce the present, and they have produced an Abraham Lincoln. And if between an Abraham Lincoln and a Rolls Royce, there is no compromise. The com- -- the future which Abraham Lincoln guaranteed for the United States at the moment when nobody else gua- -- would -- guarantee it, you see, has not -- was not existing in the present. He created it. And thereby four years of war were fought. And they held on and on, and then you see how little hope he had, but how much faith he had to have.

And that's a very clear example of the simplicity of the truth, that faith transforms the future into a fact, against the present odds. The present is the enemy of the future. This is very serious, gentlemen, because I see you all running for a non-existing future produced by the present. You don't believe it yourself, that the -- the machine politician will create the future. You have to create the future against the politicians, because you have the faith, and they have only the hope to be re-elected.

This is very serious, gentlemen. America is visited by the most absurd heresy today, which says that the future is the product of past and present. When you go a psychiatrist, and he will tell you that all the neurotic cases are such where people have no present. They haven't -- you see, they are running, running, running, running. They are haunted. Haunted man is a man who has not a future in faith.

This is the center of course of modern -- of modern man's problem. And the more you teach physics, the more rampant the illness will become, if you teach it one-sided. The physicists are our white hope; and the physics are our black hope, because the -- if you see a physicist devoted to his work for 30 years, without any hope of success, you see, just in the faith that somebody has to be devoted to this, then you see that this man has no present, except in reflection of his future. And you, too, if you are good students, gentlemen. It is your future which at this moment makes you suffer even the agony of going to lectures.

It's so simple that one -- I'm always ashamed that I have to stress this

point, but I have found that I have to. Because you are the prey -- in your brain, in these extremities here of your -- compartmentalization in your mind with the most horrid heresies. And you really believe that the future is later than the present. But there can be no present unless you believe that there is a future. You wouldn't come to this lecture unless you knew that you wouldn't be slaughtered in this room, you see, that you could leave it alive after an hour. {Even that} anticipation of the future, {which} is very clear. You want to take an exam. You want to get a degree. You want to find a husband. Heavens! Everything is based on these -- your -- may be wrong. But it is an assumption of the future that is waiting for you. And now you fill in the -- the present, you see, with intermediary steps. The present is the intermediary, which only by an act of faith you can make fruitful. And if you run with the hounds, and only follow the -- the headlines in the papers, you have neither present nor future.

This universe then of the -- antiquity shall -- we shall deal with in four chapters: the creation of parents, the creation of -- of priests, the creation of prophets, and the creation of poets. And -- I assume that I will bring the Greek chapter of the poets first, and the -- Israel second, but -- that's -- we may see how it works out as we go along, because they are contemporary. Homer, and King David, and Solomon are contemporaries. And Homer is the first poet of humanity, and David is the first neither tribal nor empire governor. So there have -- we have clearly four attempts in antiquity to solve the problem of a lived-in, understandable, and appealing universe.

The word "universe" is therefore the -- the "Sesame -- Open, Sesame" for all of history, although the universe of the Greek mind, and the universe of a migrating tribe looks very differently. Still, the term "universe" appe- -- applies to all these. And we'll see how much the endeavor of the most -- as I said of the most primitive man, and of the greatest naturalists--like Posidonius in antiquity, or Aristotle, has always been the universe. The same obsession. No different.

The difficulty now -- let me add -- I have still 10 minutes, have I? Is that right? You see, you are privileged. You can see when it will the end, I can't. What time is it?

(12 o'clock.)

Please tell me.

(Three minutes after 12.)


(Three minutes after 12.)

Oh, plenty of time.

Before I traveled west, I went to the capital of the state of New Hampshire, in whose Dartmouth College and Mr. -- your provost and I had met. And I had business there. And on the commons of this little town of Concord, New Hampshire, which is a state capital--and its only distinction, as in all capitals, is the golden cupola, you see, of the -- of the legislature building--I found a strange thing, a kind of Arc de Triomphe. An arc in stone. I stopped. And nobody had told me that I would find such a thing. And I copied the -- inscription. And the inscription is very simple. It's an -- it's an ancient -- in ancient Roman's -- classicist's style, this arc. You can go underneath it, pass it by. It stands alongside the street, near the capitol hill, or -- and the -- and the -- the supreme court of the state, et cetera. And it says, "To the memory of our soldiers and sailors, the city of Concord builds this monument."

Now that's all. No date. No names. Very strange. They are so sure that any man standing there on -- at this spot can identify himself with the unity of the state of New Hampshire. It's a very small state, as you know, and lives by gambling now. So it isn't much of a state, because it's really bankrupt. But it has this pride, which is quite amazing. It would be as if you would fix on the -- on the -- with the caller's card at the entrance to your dormitory, you see, that "To -- your memory," you see, "this is dedicated." Well, it wouldn't last more than a year, because then somebody else would move in and would not feel bound at all to respect your inscription.

You can't eternalize your name on a building. But can these people? "To the memory of our soldiers and sailors, the city of Concord builds this monument." No year given. You don't know -- is it for the Civil War? Is it for the war against the British? And the "our" is very strange. Who is this city of Concord, which can so proudly say, "To the memory of our soldiers and sailors"? Has the town of Concord a soul? Is it the mayor of Concord the man who -- and his wife who say "our"? Who says "our?"

I give you this example, because this is the quandary of any participation in history. We all are not able, and we all, just the same, do claim that we -- it is our history. This pretense of the citizens of Concord, or whoever it was who -- established this, who says, "To the memory of our soldiers and sailors, the city of Concord builds this monument" is a very intricate one, because it comprises two assumptions--or more, probably--that are not true. Or are at least very fallible. That this monument can be understood even after the state of Concord -- of -- of New Hampshire has been -- become a part of New England, you see, the newest

highway system. Because with superhighways, New Hampshire, it will be just -- is going to disappear. And "our sailors." Who has the right to say "our"? If people have all moved away, they have all died, who still has the heart to say, "Our sailors and -- and soldiers"? And no subscription.

And then comes the most interesting fact which I want you to retain as very important: the individual group of men, the contemporaries of an event, cannot claim to understand history. Believe me. This is an assumption which -- which makes people haughty, and is a great misfortune. You think you can study history. I have studied history all my life, and I have come to the conclusion that this isn't so, because we need three generations before there is history. You can speak of the memory. The word "memory" on this monument is very touching. Because instead of proudly seeing -- saying that they have -- become history, you see, it says simply, "We will remember them," which is a very different thing. Because it is the way in which those needed three generations, who can together make history, understand history, tell history, you see, it tries to forge them, to fuse them to the memory. Memory is this element by which two generations can coalesce, isn't it? It's a contribution you make. History looks like chemistry, you see. It stinks. But memory is a very human thing. It's our -- one of our best qualities. Every grateful man is -- must remember. Ingratitude is non- -- not remembering. There is so much to be grateful for. And if people don't want to remember -- don't be -- want to be grateful, they have to throw out their memories. Which they do.

But on the whole, I think 90 percent of the people are delighted that they are able to be grateful. And therefore, I wanted you--before setting out for our big odyssey of world history, universal history--I wanted you to sharpen the edge of your memory. There is much more in your memory about universal history than you care to acknowledge. I don't have to tell you the whole story. You know so much about prehistorical people, about the Greeks, about the Jews, about the Egyptians, you will be surprised. I will try to bring you to the acknowledgement that you know this story already. And I only wanted to wake up in your dim memory, under all this thick veneer of rouge, what you really know. You know much more about the unity of history than you care to admit in view of -- of television.

Thank you.

Will somebody take it upon himself to remind us of this lecture, "The Distinction of Past and Future"?