Sir Darius the Clairvoyent

Revisiting the Eternal: Myth, History, and the Question of Progress

Recommended Posts

Perspectives on Time

Neil Oliver begins his book Wisdom of the Ancients by reflecting on the uncertainties of our modern world. He contrasts apocalyptic warnings of catastrophe with evidence of progress: fewer people in poverty, better living conditions, increased life expectancy, and groundbreaking advancements in medicine and technology. Yet, even with these achievements, peace of mind remains elusive. In search of wisdom, Oliver turns to the past, exploring how our ancestors perceived and navigated their world.

 

Similarly, the question of how time is understood—whether as a linear progression or as a recurring cycle—has shaped the worldviews of different cultures throughout history. Lets explore


The Greek View: Hesiod’s Ages of Man

Hesiod’s Works and Days presents one of the most detailed accounts of time as a sequence of ages, each with distinct characteristics and a gradual decline from an ideal past. Hesiod describes five ages:

  • The Golden Age: Ruled by Cronos, this was a time of perfect harmony and abundance. Humans lived without toil, suffering, or conflict. The earth provided its fruits freely, and death came gently, like sleep. After their deaths, the spirits of the Golden Age became guardians of humanity.

  • The Silver Age: This generation was less noble, characterized by immaturity and foolishness. Humans lived as children for a hundred years and showed no reverence for the gods. Zeus, angered by their impiety, ended their time.

  • The Bronze Age: A race of warriors arose, obsessed with violence and destruction. They were hard-hearted, used bronze for tools and weapons, and left no lasting legacy, as their lives ended in self-destruction.

  • The Heroic Age: A deviation from the pattern of decline, this age produced noble demigods who fought in legendary wars like Troy. After death, they were granted a special place in the Islands of the Blessed.

  • The Iron Age: Hesiod’s own era, marked by toil, strife, and moral decay. In this time, envy, dishonor, and injustice prevail, and Hesiod laments the loss of virtue and harmony.

This linear progression, from an idealized beginning to a degraded present, mirrors a sense of nostalgia and pessimism about humanity's trajectory. Hesiod’s narrative ends with a sense of inevitability: decline is unavoidable, and Zeus will eventually destroy even this race of men.


The Norse and Indian Cycles of Time

While the Greek conception of time in Hesiod's Works and Days is linear, the Norse and Indian traditions embrace a cyclical view of time, with the universe moving through repeating phases of creation, destruction, and renewal.

The Norse Perspective:
In Norse mythology, time begins with the creation of the world from Ymir’s body, but this harmony is temporary. Over time, chaos grows as Loki and his monstrous offspring bring strife to the gods and humanity. The world reaches its breaking point at Ragnarok, the apocalyptic battle where gods and mortals perish. However, Ragnarok is not the end. After the destruction, a new world emerges from the sea, green and fertile, and survivors live in peace. The cycle begins anew, symbolizing endless renewal.

The Indian Yugas:
Indian cosmology divides time into four yugas, or ages, which form a repeating cycle:

  1. Satya Yuga (Golden Age): A time of perfect virtue, harmony, and abundance.
  2. Treta Yuga (Silver Age): Moral and spiritual decline begins, and humanity must work to sustain itself.
  3. Dvapara Yuga (Bronze Age): Conflict, greed, and suffering grow.
  4. Kali Yuga (Iron Age): The current age, characterized by chaos, immorality, and decay.

At the end of Kali Yuga, the universe is destroyed and then recreated, beginning a new cycle with Satya Yuga. This cyclical understanding of time reflects a belief in eternal renewal and the inevitability of change, contrasting sharply with Hesiod’s finality.'

 

Shared Patterns Across Traditions

While the specifics differ, the Greek, Norse, and Indian traditions share remarkable similarities in how they describe the epochs of time:

  • The Ideal Beginning:
    All three traditions start with a Golden Age: a time of peace, abundance, and harmony. In Hesiod's Works and Days, this is the era under Cronos, where humans lived like gods. In Norse mythology, it is the initial creation, where the gods live in peace and craft beautiful things from gold. In Indian tradition, it is the Satya Yuga, a time of perfect dharma (virtue).

  • Gradual Decline:
    Each tradition describes a process of degeneration. The Greeks move from the Golden to the Iron Age, marked by increasing toil and moral decay. Similarly, the Norse narrative shows harmony breaking down as chaos and conflict culminate in Ragnarok. In Indian cosmology, the yugas progress from Satya (virtue) to Kali (chaos).

  • Violence and Strife in the Middle Ages:
    The Bronze Age in Hesiod’s account, the later yugas in Indian tradition, and the Norse struggles against the jotnar all highlight a period dominated by violence, conflict, and a focus on martial prowess. These ages are transitional, setting the stage for ultimate destruction or renewal.

  • The Apocalyptic End:
    The Iron Age in Hesiod’s account aligns with the chaotic Kali Yuga and the Norse Ragnarok, all depicting a final collapse marked by greed, strife, and a loss of morality.

  • Possibility of Renewal:
    While the Greek tradition ends on a pessimistic note, both Norse and Indian cosmologies emphasize cyclical renewal. After Ragnarok, the Norse world is reborn, and after Kali Yuga, the Indian cosmos begins anew with Satya Yuga.

 

 

Here’s the continuation with the remaining sections translated into English:


Liberalism, Marxism, and Nationalism

The past two centuries have been marked by three major ideologies that have shaped societal development: liberalism, Marxism, and nationalism. While all three emerged from the challenges of modernity, they can be understood as reactions to one another—each attempting to address society's issues but from radically different perspectives.

Liberalism arose during the Enlightenment with a focus on individual freedom, rights, and property. Inspired by thinkers like John Locke and Adam Smith, it became the foundation of modern democracy and capitalism. Through market economies and rational institutions, society was envisioned as progressing linearly toward greater liberty and prosperity.

However, the massive social inequalities of industrialization revealed liberalism’s limitations. The working class was marginalized, and many felt alienated in a system that rewarded the privileged. This created room for a powerful critique of liberalism, led by Karl Marx.

Marxism was developed as a direct reaction to the ideals of liberalism. Marx argued that the "free" market economy and individual liberty were illusions because capitalism reduced workers to commodities in a system that served the wealthy. Where liberalism celebrated individual rights, Marxism claimed these masked class oppression.

For Marx, history was a process driven by class struggle. The goal was a radical transformation of society—a classless community where the means of production were collectively owned. Marxism rejected liberalism’s belief in gradual progress and called for revolution as the path to liberation. At the same time, Marx’s vision of international class struggle stood in contrast to a third emerging ideology: nationalism.

Nationalism, which developed alongside liberalism and Marxism, offered a different response to the challenges of modernity. While liberalism emphasized the individual and Marxism focused on international solidarity, nationalism placed the nation at the center—a community built on shared language, culture, and history.

Nationalism was a reaction against liberalism’s global market and Marxism’s universalism. It provided a collective identity in a time when many experienced fragmentation and rootlessness. Through struggles for national independence and cultural revival, nationalism became a powerful political force but also a source of conflict.


A Life Governed by the Clock

The introduction of mechanical clocks, Greenwich Mean Time (GMT), and the practice of punctuality marked a dramatic shift from traditional understandings of time. In older societies, time was tied to the rhythms of nature—sunrise, noon, and sunset dictated work and rest. For farmers in Norway, expressions like "sun in the eyes" and "sun behind the mountain" served as practical markers of the day’s progress. Similarly, medieval churches used the ringing of bells to signal prayer times, still aligned with daylight cycles.

In the 14th century, mechanical clocks began to break this connection by introducing a uniform division of time. Church bells regulated daily life in cities, and in monasteries, time was strictly measured by scheduled chimes. This abstract, mechanical understanding of time became a cornerstone of the Industrial Revolution, where factories required workers to adhere to precise schedules. Flexible work rhythms adapted to weather or seasons were replaced by rigid timetables. For many workers, alarm clocks—or in England, the curious profession of “knocker-uppers,” who tapped on windows to wake people—became symbols of a new and stricter time regime.

The need for coordination across distances culminated in the standardization of time. In the 19th century, GMT was established partly to ensure railways and trade operated seamlessly. Time, previously localized and tied to the sun’s position, was now globalized. Yet this standardization met resistance in many rural communities, where the abstract, uniform time system clashed with natural cycles.

This transition from an organic understanding of time to a mechanical one brought both opportunities and challenges. Mechanical clocks and GMT enabled global coordination and industrial advances, but they also replaced humanity’s natural rhythms with a uniform, strict time regime. Time, once adapted to life’s cycles, became a tool for control and efficiency—a change that continues to shape our modern relationship with the clock.


The State of Nature

The concept of the state of nature explores how humans related to one another before the establishment of societies, laws, and other constructs. For Thomas Hobbes, this state was marked by constant war, with human nature described as fundamentally brutal and selfish. In Leviathan, he famously characterized life in the state of nature as "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." To escape this chaotic condition, Hobbes argued that it was necessary to enter into a social contract and establish a strongly hierarchical and centralized societal structure.

In contrast, Jean-Jacques Rousseau believed that humans were naturally good, with an inherent ability to cooperate, living in harmony with each other and nature. This was a state marked by freedom and innocence, inspiring his slogan "back to nature!" Whether we align with Rousseau, Hobbes, or something in between, I believe our view of human nature—whether we are inherently "good" or "bad"—shapes how we think society should be organized.

David Graeber and David Wengrow’s The Dawn of Everything challenges these traditional dichotomies. They argue that early human societies were not confined to a single form of social organization. Instead, they experimented with various forms of governance, hierarchy, and social arrangements long before the advent of agriculture or the state. This diversity undermines the idea of a single "state of nature" from which modern societies evolved. The authors suggest that early humans had the creativity and freedom to choose how they organized their communities—an overlooked capacity in conventional narratives of human history.

In essence, they show that early humans were as diverse and complex as "us civilized folks" today.


Final Reflections

IMG_3665.jpeg.6184d6928203e994f905ef4063df9ec0.jpeg

What am I trying to convey? It’s difficult to say. Maybe nothing. Maybe just that there are no definitive answers to how we should live. But I want to preserve and honour the histories, cultures, mysteries and people who have shaped us. And maybe looking to the past can be just as valuable as the future. This is an immense and complex topic, so my thoughts may feel scattered, and the language might not always flow perfectly. Instead of endlessly refining this, I’ll leave you with some art and quotations:

 

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites