The Lessons of History

This book is very thought-provoking and is strongly recommended for those liberals who advocate saving as many people as possible in any disaster and especially those in social services in the belief that saving everyone will make this planet a better place.

I had heard so many good things about this book that I was really looking forward to it. Instead of clearly laid out lessons (OK -there were two early), he rambles over the inevitable rise and fall of civilizations and the fact that this isn't all bad.

I was surprised to see so many people mooning over this slim and cherry-picked screed by the Durants. I generally find them to be learned and balanced, but their reliance on Malthusian arguments in this work makes Mein Kampf look like a Harlequin Romance. The laughable predictions are mostly forgivable, but the chapter on race that depicts the heroic triumph of the Nordic types (Sound like anyone we know?) is as downright creepy as it is contemptible and poorly researched. These Blue eyed heroes apparently sired all of the races in the world, or at least played a significant role in this. Funny thing is: I don't see a lot of tall Blond haired people with Blue eyes running the world. Some of the chapters are charming if naive, but for the most part, it is a sloppy pastiche that should never have made it into print.

Didn't make it halfway through. It's a slow read, full of anecdotes and ramblings. If you get any history out of it, it's nothing that hasn't been covered elsewhere and in far greater clarity and detail.

The Lessons of History is a kind of grand overview of what the Durant's learned about history while writing their Story of Civilization. Early chapters, particularly on biology and history, have some extremely insightful and thought-provoking material, but unfortunately, it goes downhill from there. The final chapters on the roles of religion, economics, government, and war throughout history have some very bad analysis that finds Durant in his old age reversing some of his better ideas from his earlier years.

This audio edition also includes some brief interview snippets with the Durants interspersed between the chapters, which only serve to highlight the problems. Even Ariel occasionally calls Will out on his inconsistencies. In the chapter on economics (and in the interview afterwards), for example, Durant rejects a Marxist view of history but explicitly embraces a Hegelian one, saying the problem with Marx is not his deterministic view that economic forces shape the course of history, but that he didn't take the Hegelian premise to its logical conclusion in saying that Communism would supplant Capitalism. Rather, says Durant, we are moving toward a Hegelian Synthesis of the two. As this suggests, Durant has also by this time moved away from his earlier view that innovative individuals move history, and more toward the view that they are merely products of their times.

He had also come to be much less critical of religion, viewing Christian morality as the basis of Western civilization without which our other achievements would fall. This is extremely dubious, and he of all people ought to know better, given everything he had previously written on the subject!

Perhaps worst of all is the dichotomy he sets up between "freedom" and "order", saying they are antitheses but equally desirable. The problem with modern society, he says, is that we have too much freedom, and not enough order. This leads him to conclude that the government should impose various totalitarian controls, up to and including full-blown eugenics, with government approval necessary to determine who is physically and mentally fit to be allowed to reproduce. Did he learn nothing from the Nazi and fascist experiments of the mid-twentieth century?!

The only excuse I can make for him is that he is writing at one of the most volatile times in our history at the end of the 1960s, with all the extremes of the social revolution and the outbreak of the Vietnam war. And somewhat to his credit, while his optimism is clearly gone and he talks blithely of the imminent destruction of the human race, he still hasn't swung fully toward pessimism and notes, for instance, the then recent developments in agriculture in synthetic fertilizers and Norman Borlaug's high-yield wheat strains that allowed the unprecedented feeding of Asia.

So on the whole I had rather mixed feelings about this. It had some very good material, but interspersed with much more that was very bad, for the Durants. I'd recommend reading The Story of Philosophy or The Greatest Minds and Ideas of All Time instead.

Although I am a history buff, I had never before read anything written by the Durants. I had seen their tomes in bookstores and libraries, but their sheer volume was always intimidating. Well, I read this one because it was assigned to our book club.

I am not sure what the point of this book is. It seems to be an apologia by the Durants for having spent a long lifetime writing in a field that they have now decided does not really advance the ball. They address and pick apart a series of historiographic theories of historical analysis. In the end, they seem to conclude that none is really meaningful in synthesizing why history happened as it did.

The book is actually easier to read than its preface suggested. It is a short book and a relatively fast read for such a dense subject. But in the end, I was left wondering why it was published and why I read it.

Will and Ariel Durant are authors of the magnificent, dense, big, 10 volume intellectual history of the West. At the end of their careers they wrote a series of essays distilling themes and lessons from their studies. Each chapter looks at a very big idea: the earth, biology, race, character, morals, religion, economics, socialism, government, war, and then ends with two dynamic topics, Growth and Decay, and Is Progress Real. The weakest chapters are those furthest from their expertise: earth science and biology. But even here there is a realization as to the salience of certain topics, e.g., evolution. In fact, evolution and heritability remain themes throughout the rest of the chapters. Their viewpoints about these were probably liberal at the time they wrote them, but might be considered reactionary in today’s academic climate. Overall, this was an enjoyable read, even if one is left without an overarching lesson to the lessons. In fact, that is probably good: it shows a freedom from ideology. But turn to any page at random (I just did this) and you get sentences like “Nations die” and “Civilizations are the generations of the racial soul.” Perhaps trite and not as poetic as their authors intended, but to the point.

It was a literary delight to read this historical compendium written a half a century ago. The authors, of course, were ignorant of the collapse of the Cold War 20 years later and of the arrival of the digital revolution and the information age and yet, it is remarkable how little today’s judgment about the historical events has changed from that expressed by these two scholars decades ago.

My interest was particularly stirred by a question they raised toward the end of their review. After the tremendous progress human civilization has made since the agricultural revolution some 12 000 years ago, they said, we still don’t really know where we are going. What is our next target? More technical advances, more personal comfort, is that it? My feeling is, oh yes, there are very urgent tasks that history places before us. There are two of them: We’ve certainly reached the evolutionary stage where, firstly, we are capable of upgrading pragmatism and dispassionate reasoning in public debate and in governmental decision-making and, secondly, we create a global federation with global law and justice. The first would eject the demagogues, market-criers, fanatics and false prophets from the temple of good sense in favor of levelheaded experts, and the other would eliminate wars altogether and replace them with peaceful cooperation among the nations around the globe. Quite feasible tasks, you must admit, and the 21st century is waiting for it.

I looked forward to this book for several reasons: The Pulitzer Prize and Presidential Medal of Freedom winning Durants exemplify one of the great love stories from young beginnings at the university to their sad ending, still together after 70 years of worldwide discovery; their massive 11 volume, 10,000 page history series is one of the seven wonders of academic accomplishment; and they tried to tell the truth about history without modern day political agenda. With this in mind their “Lessons of History” was a slight disappointment early on as it belabored caveats and cautionary warnings about the hazards of historical analysis. That behind me, the book began to pick up with the kind of summary surveys one would expect available from such a broad body of knowledge. Some of it reads like prophecy. Like “The concentration of wealth is natural and inevitable, and is periodically alleviated by violent [Rome 133 BC] or peaceable [Greece 594 BC] partial redistribution…concentrating wealth and compulsive recirculation.” And on the state of religion the Durants write, “Christianity lent a hand against itself by developing in Christians a moral sense that could no longer stomach the vengeful God of traditional theology…Christianity destroyed Jehovah…(see Marcel Gauchet’s “Disenchantment of the World”) A thousand signs proclaim that Christianity is undergoing the same decline that fell upon the old Greek religion after the coming of Sophists and the Greek Enlightenment…There is no significant example in history of a society successfully maintaining moral life without the aid of religion.” If this isn’t a dilemma of the modern West, nothing is. The Durant’s also touch on the effects of industrialization, individualism, and moral decline – a topic of great personal interest to this reader as triggered by Dumont’s “Essays On Individualism.” There are 12 topics treated, including biology, character, government, growth and progress. This turned out to be a splendid little book - only 100 pages, or about 30,000 words.

It should be read in school, but only when you're mature enough to have a good perspective on history and life.
Probably one of the best 100-pages I've ever read.

Key concepts:
- There is no humorist like history.
- One of the best things a "fair" society can offer is the equality of educational opportunities. (p.101)
- War is part of the human nature.
- Civilization = social order promoting cultural creation (p.87)
- Progress = increasing control of environment by life (p.98)
Below is the transcription of the sentences I liked the most from each chapter.

1. Hesitations
Of what use is history?

2. History and the Earth
History = records from the past; lesson of modesty.

3. Biology and History
Biological lessons:
1. Life is competition
2. Life is selection. Inequality is inborn, and it grows with
the complexity of civilization. Life and history select the
30% of men whose combined ability equal that of all the
rest. Nature smiles at the union of freedom and equality in
our utopias, biologically doomed. The best that the amiable
philosopher can hope for is an approximate equality of legal
justice and educational opportunity.
3. Life must breed. She is more interested in the species than
in the individual. If the human brood is too numerous for the
food supply, Nature has three agents for restoring the
balance: famine, pestilence, and war. Ideally parentage
should be a privilege of health, not a by-product of sexual
agitation. The labors of educators are apparently canceled in
each generation by the fertility of the uninformed. But much
of what we called intelligence is the result of individual
education, opportunity, and experience.

4. Race and History
See the one-paragraph "this is one summary of history." The role
of race in history is rather preliminary than creative. It is
not the race that makes the civilization, it is the civilization
that makes the people.

5. Character and History
Society is founded not on the ideals but on the nature of man,
which we may define as the fundamental tendencies and feelings
of mankind (see table). Known history shows little alteration in
the conduct of mankind. Evolution in man during recorded time
has been social rather than biological.

6. Morals and History
Morals are the rules by which a society exhorts its members and
associations to behaviour consistent with its order, security,
and growth. A little knowledge of history stresses the
variability of moral codes, which adjust themselves to
historical and environmental conditions. Monogamy was demanded
by the approximate numerical equality of the sexes. History
offers some consolation by reminding us that sin has flourished
in every age. In every age men have been dishonest and
governments have been corrupt; probably less now than generally
before. Meanwhile much of our moral freedom is good.

7. Religion and History
Even the skeptical historian develops a humble respect for
religion, since it sees it functioning, and seemingly
indispensable in every land and age. It has kept the poor (said
Napoleon) from murdering the rich. Religion does not seem at
first to have had any connection with morals. History has
justified the Curch in the belief that the masses of mankind
desire a religion rich in miracle, mistery, and mith. The
growing awareness of man's minuscule place in the cosmos has
furthered the impairment of religious belief. A thousand signs
proclaim that Christianity is undergoing the same decline that
fell upon the old Greek religion after the coming of the Sophist
and the Greek Enlightenment. There is no significant example in
history, before our time, of a society successfully maintaining
moral life without the aid of religion. As long as there is
poverty there will be gods.

8. Economics and History
History, according to Marx, is economics in action. The rate of
concentration (of wealth) varies (other factors being equal)
with the economic freedom permitted by the morals and the
laws. The concentration of wealth is natural and inevitable, and
it is periodically alleviated by violent or peaceable partial
redistribution. In this view all economic history is the slow
heartbeat of the social organism, a vast systole and diastole of
concentrating wealth and compulsive recirculation.

9. Socialism and History
The struggle of socialism against capitalism is part of the
historic rhythm in the concentration and dispersion of
wealth. [...] taxation rose to such heights that men lost
incentive to work or earn, and an erosive contest began between
lawyers finding devices to evade taxes and lawyers formulating
laws to prevent evasion.

10. Government and History
The first condition of freedom is its limitation; make it
absolute and it dies in chaos. So the prime task of government
is to establish order; organized central force is the sole
alternative to incalculable and disruptive force in private
hands. If we were to judge forms of government from their
prevalence and duration in history we should have to give the
palm to monarchy; democracies, by contrast, have been hectic
interludes. Most governments have been oligarchies--ruled by a
minority, chosen either by birth, as in aristocracies, or by a
religious organization, as in theocracies, or by wealth, as in
democracies. Does history justify revolutions? Violent
revolutions do not so much redistribute wealth as destroy
it. The only real revolution is in the enlightenment of the
mind and the improvement of character, the only real
emancipation is individual, and the only real revolutionarists
are philosophers and saints. Democracy is the most difficult of
all forms of government, since it requires the wildest spread
of intelligence, and we forgot to make ourselves intelligent
when we made ourselves sovereign. Education has spread, but
intelligence is perpetually retarded by the fertility of the
simple. All deductions having been made, democracy has done
less harm, and more good, than any other form of government. If
equality of educational opportunity can be established,
democracy will be real and justified.

11. History and War
War is one of the constants of history, and has not diminished
with civilization or democracy. One war can now destroy the
labour of centuries in building cities, creating art, and
developing habits of civilization. In the military
interpretation of history war is the final arbiter, and is
accepted as natural and necessary by all but the cowards and
simpletons. Read the one-page imaginary speech of the "American
President saying to the leaders of China and Russia": it is
great.

12. Growth and Decay
We have defined civilization as "social order promoting
cultural creation." Are there any regularities, in this process
of growth and decay, which may enable us to predict, from the
course of past civilizations, the future of our own? History
repeats itself, but only in outline and in the large [...]
because human nature changes with geological leisureliness, and
man is equipped to respond in stereotyped ways to frequently
occurring situations and stimuli like hunger, danger, and
sex. Death is natural [...] But do civilizations die? Again,
not quite. Nations die. Civilizations are the generations of
the racial soul.

13. Is Progress Real?
Against this panorama of nations, morals, and religions rising
and falling, the idea of progress finds itself in dubious
shape. Is it only the vain and traditional boast of each
"modern" generation? Have we given ourselves more freedom than
our intelligence can digest? Perhaps we should first define
what progress means to us. If it means increase in happiness
its case is lost almost at first sight. We shall here define
progress as the increasing control of the environment by
life. It is a test that may hold for the lowliest organism as
well as for man [then] progress is real. (p.101 is a key
page). So our finest contemporary achievement is our
unprecedented expenditure of wealth and toil in the provision
of higher education for all [...] we have raised the level and
average of knowledge beyond any age in history. Consider
education not as the painful accumulation of facts and dates
and reigns, nor merely the necessary preparation of the
individual to earn his keep in the world, but as the
transmission of our mental, moral, technical, and aesthetic
heritage as fully as possible to as many as possible, for the
enlargement of man's understanding, control, embellishment, and
enjoyment of life. If a man is fortunate he will, before he
dies, gather up as much as he can of his civilized heritage and
transmit it to his children. And to his final breath he will be
grateful for this inexhaustible legacy, knowing that it is our
nourishing mother and our lasting life.

Will and Ariel Durant were awarded the Pulitzer Prize in 1968 and the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1977, primarily for their 11-volume series, "The Story of Civilization," which is probably the last attempt we will ever see---in this age of increasing specialization---of a single historian (or couple) attempting a "universal history."

They wrote in the Preface of this 1968 book, "After finishing 'The Story of Civilization' to 1789, we reread the ten volumes with a view to issuing a revised edition that would correct many errors of omission, fact, or print. In that process we made note of events and comments that might illuminate present affairs, future probabilities, the nature of man, and the conduct of states... We tried to defer our conclusions until we had completed our survey of the narrative... The following essay is the result."

They observe, "History offers some consolation by reminding us that sin has flourished in every age. Even our generation has not yet rivaled ... ancient Greece or Rome or Renaissance Italy." (Pg. 40) They add, "Even the skeptical historian develops a humble respect for religion, since he sees it functioning, and seemingly indispensable, in every land and age... For since the natural inequality of men dooms many of us to poverty or defeat, some supernatural hope may be the sole alternative to despair. Destroy that hope, and class war is intensified. Heaven and utopia are buckets in a well: when one goes down the other goes up; when religion declines Communism grows." (Pg. 43)

They add, "One lesson of history is that religion has many lives, and a habit of resurrection. How often in the past have God and religion died and been reborn!" (Pg. 49) They conclude, "Democracy is the most difficult of all forms of government, since it requires the widest spread of intelligence, and we forgot to make ourselves intelligent when we made ourselves sovereign. Education has spread, but intelligence is perpetually retarded by the fertility of the simple." (Pg. 78)

Although often forgotten in modern times, the Durants' 11-volume series was once a staple of "Book-of-the-Month Club" introductory promotions, and widely read. Although some of their "lessons" may be out of sync with the modern temperament, they are well worth reading, as the products of some immensely-literate writers.

Fantastic survey of what can be learned from world history. I read this book because it was recommended on the Youtube talk show "The David Pakman Show". The authors have a unique perspective on history by stepping backward and looking at long term trends. They point out how history can be looked upon as a series of increases and reductions in income inequality. They make the case that the highest historcal standard of living may have been during the Pax Romana period between 30 BC and 180 AD, from Augustus to Marcus Aurelius. They explain why that happened and how the dictatorial system of government was suspended for allowing a senate to function. There have been many such periods in history that people are unaware of but they usually are ended due to increasing resentment from the rich who stage a military revolt which often has a natural disaster as a catalyst.

I was fascinated to learn that there were socialist governments (actually it means an economy managed by the government) as far back as recorded history allows like in Sumer in 2100 BC and Babylon in 1750 BC. The clay tables proved that the government set the wages for all workers and ran a justice system. It happened four times in Ancient China the first of which produced a time of extreme prosperity. The emperor Wu Ti (140-87 BC) "nationalized the resources of the soil, extended governmental direction over transport and trade, laid a tax upon incomes, and established public works. The state bought accumulated stockpiles of goods, sold these when prices were rising, bought more when prices were falling to regulate prices." This prosperous era was ended by a major drought causing prices to rise out of control and the angry businessmen brought back a return to the old system. It seems like that ancient Chinese government was extremely progressive and forward thinking. It also shows how little has changed since the angry corporate leaders in the 1980s in the US ended the prosperous time from 1935-1980 in order to lower taxes for the rich.

The Inca empire had the longest government-run economy lasting almost 300 years. The Inca government managed all agriculture, labor and trade. They had a government census that kept track of materials, people, and income, and every person was an employee of the state. They came as close as possible to ending poverty and their economic system was stable enough that it took the conquest of Pizzaro to end it.

This is a history that few people read about and the perspective of Will and Ariel Durant is very impressive. They lived a long time having been born in the 1800s and the book was written in 1968. The audiobook has many interviews with the authors and this information compliments the text of the book.

One last interesting takeaway is that the author sees the "synthesis" of capitalism and socialism to be the goal of the evolution of economies. He said that Karl Marx thought that socialism would destroy capitalism which violated the teachings of Hegel. The author Will Durant says that Hegel was right and the result is the economies of northern Europe which use a "synthesis" of capitalism and socialism and they seem to be working the best today.

I looked forward to this book for several reasons: The Pulitzer Prize and Presidential Medal of Freedom winning Durants exemplify one of the great love stories from young beginnings at the university to their sad ending, still together after 70 years of worldwide discovery; their massive 11 volume, 10,000 page history series is one of the seven wonders of academic accomplishment; and they tried to tell the truth about history without modern day political agenda. With this in mind their “Lessons of History” was a slight disappointment early on as it belabored caveats and cautionary warnings about the hazards of historical analysis. That behind me, the book began to pick up with the kind of summary surveys one would expect available from such a broad body of knowledge. Some of it reads like prophecy. Like “The concentration of wealth is natural and inevitable, and is periodically alleviated by violent [Rome 133 BC] or peaceable [Greece 594 BC] partial redistribution…concentrating wealth and compulsive recirculation.” And on the state of religion the Durants write, “Christianity lent a hand against itself by developing in Christians a moral sense that could no longer stomach the vengeful God of traditional theology…Christianity destroyed Jehovah…(see Marcel Gauchet’s “Disenchantment of the World”) A thousand signs proclaim that Christianity is undergoing the same decline that fell upon the old Greek religion after the coming of Sophists and the Greek Enlightenment…There is no significant example in history of a society successfully maintaining moral life without the aid of religion.” If this isn’t a dilemma of the modern West, nothing is. The Durant’s also touch on the effects of industrialization, individualism, and moral decline – a topic of great personal interest to this reader as triggered by Dumont’s “Essays On Individualism.” There are 12 topics treated, including biology, character, government, growth and progress. This turned out to be a splendid little book - only 100 pages, or about 30,000 words.

It should be read in school, but only when you're mature enough to have a good perspective on history and life.
Probably one of the best 100-pages I've ever read.

Key concepts:
- There is no humorist like history.
- One of the best things a "fair" society can offer is the equality of educational opportunities. (p.101)
- War is part of the human nature.
- Civilization = social order promoting cultural creation (p.87)
- Progress = increasing control of environment by life (p.98)
Below is the transcription of the sentences I liked the most from each chapter.

1. Hesitations
Of what use is history?

2. History and the Earth
History = records from the past; lesson of modesty.

3. Biology and History
Biological lessons:
1. Life is competition
2. Life is selection. Inequality is inborn, and it grows with
the complexity of civilization. Life and history select the
30% of men whose combined ability equal that of all the
rest. Nature smiles at the union of freedom and equality in
our utopias, biologically doomed. The best that the amiable
philosopher can hope for is an approximate equality of legal
justice and educational opportunity.
3. Life must breed. She is more interested in the species than
in the individual. If the human brood is too numerous for the
food supply, Nature has three agents for restoring the
balance: famine, pestilence, and war. Ideally parentage
should be a privilege of health, not a by-product of sexual
agitation. The labors of educators are apparently canceled in
each generation by the fertility of the uninformed. But much
of what we called intelligence is the result of individual
education, opportunity, and experience.

4. Race and History
See the one-paragraph "this is one summary of history." The role
of race in history is rather preliminary than creative. It is
not the race that makes the civilization, it is the civilization
that makes the people.

5. Character and History
Society is founded not on the ideals but on the nature of man,
which we may define as the fundamental tendencies and feelings
of mankind (see table). Known history shows little alteration in
the conduct of mankind. Evolution in man during recorded time
has been social rather than biological.

6. Morals and History
Morals are the rules by which a society exhorts its members and
associations to behaviour consistent with its order, security,
and growth. A little knowledge of history stresses the
variability of moral codes, which adjust themselves to
historical and environmental conditions. Monogamy was demanded
by the approximate numerical equality of the sexes. History
offers some consolation by reminding us that sin has flourished
in every age. In every age men have been dishonest and
governments have been corrupt; probably less now than generally
before. Meanwhile much of our moral freedom is good.

7. Religion and History
Even the skeptical historian develops a humble respect for
religion, since it sees it functioning, and seemingly
indispensable in every land and age. It has kept the poor (said
Napoleon) from murdering the rich. Religion does not seem at
first to have had any connection with morals. History has
justified the Curch in the belief that the masses of mankind
desire a religion rich in miracle, mistery, and mith. The
growing awareness of man's minuscule place in the cosmos has
furthered the impairment of religious belief. A thousand signs
proclaim that Christianity is undergoing the same decline that
fell upon the old Greek religion after the coming of the Sophist
and the Greek Enlightenment. There is no significant example in
history, before our time, of a society successfully maintaining
moral life without the aid of religion. As long as there is
poverty there will be gods.

8. Economics and History
History, according to Marx, is economics in action. The rate of
concentration (of wealth) varies (other factors being equal)
with the economic freedom permitted by the morals and the
laws. The concentration of wealth is natural and inevitable, and
it is periodically alleviated by violent or peaceable partial
redistribution. In this view all economic history is the slow
heartbeat of the social organism, a vast systole and diastole of
concentrating wealth and compulsive recirculation.

9. Socialism and History
The struggle of socialism against capitalism is part of the
historic rhythm in the concentration and dispersion of
wealth. [...] taxation rose to such heights that men lost
incentive to work or earn, and an erosive contest began between
lawyers finding devices to evade taxes and lawyers formulating
laws to prevent evasion.

10. Government and History
The first condition of freedom is its limitation; make it
absolute and it dies in chaos. So the prime task of government
is to establish order; organized central force is the sole
alternative to incalculable and disruptive force in private
hands. If we were to judge forms of government from their
prevalence and duration in history we should have to give the
palm to monarchy; democracies, by contrast, have been hectic
interludes. Most governments have been oligarchies--ruled by a
minority, chosen either by birth, as in aristocracies, or by a
religious organization, as in theocracies, or by wealth, as in
democracies. Does history justify revolutions? Violent
revolutions do not so much redistribute wealth as destroy
it. The only real revolution is in the enlightenment of the
mind and the improvement of character, the only real
emancipation is individual, and the only real revolutionarists
are philosophers and saints. Democracy is the most difficult of
all forms of government, since it requires the wildest spread
of intelligence, and we forgot to make ourselves intelligent
when we made ourselves sovereign. Education has spread, but
intelligence is perpetually retarded by the fertility of the
simple. All deductions having been made, democracy has done
less harm, and more good, than any other form of government. If
equality of educational opportunity can be established,
democracy will be real and justified.

11. History and War
War is one of the constants of history, and has not diminished
with civilization or democracy. One war can now destroy the
labour of centuries in building cities, creating art, and
developing habits of civilization. In the military
interpretation of history war is the final arbiter, and is
accepted as natural and necessary by all but the cowards and
simpletons. Read the one-page imaginary speech of the "American
President saying to the leaders of China and Russia": it is
great.

12. Growth and Decay
We have defined civilization as "social order promoting
cultural creation." Are there any regularities, in this process
of growth and decay, which may enable us to predict, from the
course of past civilizations, the future of our own? History
repeats itself, but only in outline and in the large [...]
because human nature changes with geological leisureliness, and
man is equipped to respond in stereotyped ways to frequently
occurring situations and stimuli like hunger, danger, and
sex. Death is natural [...] But do civilizations die? Again,
not quite. Nations die. Civilizations are the generations of
the racial soul.

13. Is Progress Real?
Against this panorama of nations, morals, and religions rising
and falling, the idea of progress finds itself in dubious
shape. Is it only the vain and traditional boast of each
"modern" generation? Have we given ourselves more freedom than
our intelligence can digest? Perhaps we should first define
what progress means to us. If it means increase in happiness
its case is lost almost at first sight. We shall here define
progress as the increasing control of the environment by
life. It is a test that may hold for the lowliest organism as
well as for man [then] progress is real. (p.101 is a key
page). So our finest contemporary achievement is our
unprecedented expenditure of wealth and toil in the provision
of higher education for all [...] we have raised the level and
average of knowledge beyond any age in history. Consider
education not as the painful accumulation of facts and dates
and reigns, nor merely the necessary preparation of the
individual to earn his keep in the world, but as the
transmission of our mental, moral, technical, and aesthetic
heritage as fully as possible to as many as possible, for the
enlargement of man's understanding, control, embellishment, and
enjoyment of life. If a man is fortunate he will, before he
dies, gather up as much as he can of his civilized heritage and
transmit it to his children. And to his final breath he will be
grateful for this inexhaustible legacy, knowing that it is our
nourishing mother and our lasting life.

Will and Ariel Durant were awarded the Pulitzer Prize in 1968 and the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1977, primarily for their 11-volume series, "The Story of Civilization," which is probably the last attempt we will ever see---in this age of increasing specialization---of a single historian (or couple) attempting a "universal history."

They wrote in the Preface of this 1968 book, "After finishing 'The Story of Civilization' to 1789, we reread the ten volumes with a view to issuing a revised edition that would correct many errors of omission, fact, or print. In that process we made note of events and comments that might illuminate present affairs, future probabilities, the nature of man, and the conduct of states... We tried to defer our conclusions until we had completed our survey of the narrative... The following essay is the result."

They observe, "History offers some consolation by reminding us that sin has flourished in every age. Even our generation has not yet rivaled ... ancient Greece or Rome or Renaissance Italy." (Pg. 40) They add, "Even the skeptical historian develops a humble respect for religion, since he sees it functioning, and seemingly indispensable, in every land and age... For since the natural inequality of men dooms many of us to poverty or defeat, some supernatural hope may be the sole alternative to despair. Destroy that hope, and class war is intensified. Heaven and utopia are buckets in a well: when one goes down the other goes up; when religion declines Communism grows." (Pg. 43)

They add, "One lesson of history is that religion has many lives, and a habit of resurrection. How often in the past have God and religion died and been reborn!" (Pg. 49) They conclude, "Democracy is the most difficult of all forms of government, since it requires the widest spread of intelligence, and we forgot to make ourselves intelligent when we made ourselves sovereign. Education has spread, but intelligence is perpetually retarded by the fertility of the simple." (Pg. 78)

Although often forgotten in modern times, the Durants' 11-volume series was once a staple of "Book-of-the-Month Club" introductory promotions, and widely read. Although some of their "lessons" may be out of sync with the modern temperament, they are well worth reading, as the products of some immensely-literate writers.

Fantastic survey of what can be learned from world history. I read this book because it was recommended on the Youtube talk show "The David Pakman Show". The authors have a unique perspective on history by stepping backward and looking at long term trends. They point out how history can be looked upon as a series of increases and reductions in income inequality. They make the case that the highest historcal standard of living may have been during the Pax Romana period between 30 BC and 180 AD, from Augustus to Marcus Aurelius. They explain why that happened and how the dictatorial system of government was suspended for allowing a senate to function. There have been many such periods in history that people are unaware of but they usually are ended due to increasing resentment from the rich who stage a military revolt which often has a natural disaster as a catalyst.

I was fascinated to learn that there were socialist governments (actually it means an economy managed by the government) as far back as recorded history allows like in Sumer in 2100 BC and Babylon in 1750 BC. The clay tables proved that the government set the wages for all workers and ran a justice system. It happened four times in Ancient China the first of which produced a time of extreme prosperity. The emperor Wu Ti (140-87 BC) "nationalized the resources of the soil, extended governmental direction over transport and trade, laid a tax upon incomes, and established public works. The state bought accumulated stockpiles of goods, sold these when prices were rising, bought more when prices were falling to regulate prices." This prosperous era was ended by a major drought causing prices to rise out of control and the angry businessmen brought back a return to the old system. It seems like that ancient Chinese government was extremely progressive and forward thinking. It also shows how little has changed since the angry corporate leaders in the 1980s in the US ended the prosperous time from 1935-1980 in order to lower taxes for the rich.

The Inca empire had the longest government-run economy lasting almost 300 years. The Inca government managed all agriculture, labor and trade. They had a government census that kept track of materials, people, and income, and every person was an employee of the state. They came as close as possible to ending poverty and their economic system was stable enough that it took the conquest of Pizzaro to end it.

This is a history that few people read about and the perspective of Will and Ariel Durant is very impressive. They lived a long time having been born in the 1800s and the book was written in 1968. The audiobook has many interviews with the authors and this information compliments the text of the book.

One last interesting takeaway is that the author sees the "synthesis" of capitalism and socialism to be the goal of the evolution of economies. He said that Karl Marx thought that socialism would destroy capitalism which violated the teachings of Hegel. The author Will Durant says that Hegel was right and the result is the economies of northern Europe which use a "synthesis" of capitalism and socialism and they seem to be working the best today.

LESSONS OF HISTORY, by Will and Ariel Durant (1968).
Perhaps I was not in the right mood when I read this book. It was a bit disappointing. I found it to be somewhat pedestrian. Somehow I expected more from a purported distillation of what the Durants had learned from the decades they had spent researching and writing “The Story Of Civilization” series; viz. an exposition that soared and challenged. This is not that book. It does, however, make some interesting points along the way, whether or not one agrees with them.

For example, in the chapter, “Government and History,” the Durants evaluate the forms of government they encountered in researching “The Story Of Civilization.” They report that they concluded, on balance, that democracy “has done less harm and more good” than any other form of government, but was responsible for the debasement of the arts and was the most difficult form of government because, they say, “we forgot to make ourselves intelligent when we made ourselves sovereign.”

As result, they state, “ignorance lends itself to manipulation by forces that mold public opinion,” and, “It may be true, as Lincoln supposed, that you can’t fool all of the people all of the time, but you can fool enough of them to rule a large country.”

Of particular current interest is the Durants’ discussion of recurrent wealth inequality across cultures over time. They attribute this phenomenon to inequality of ability. Their expressed view is that those with skill at managing people and money have ruled over history, that this results in a destabilization of equilibrium, and wealth either gets redistributed by legislation or revolution.

The Durants used Athens in 594 BCE as an illustration. There, “The poor, finding their status worsened each year - the government in the hands of their masters, and the corrupt courts deciding every issue against them - began to talk of revolt. The rich, angry at the challenge to their property, prepared to defend themselves by force.”

Instead of a revolutionary conflict, Solon, a business man of aristocratic lineage, was elected to the supreme archonship. He undertook serious measures to avoid civil war. “...[H]e devalued the currency, thereby easing the burden on all debtors (though he himself was a creditor); he reduced all personal debts, and ended imprisonment for debt; he cancelled arrests for taxes and mortgage interest; he established a graduated income tax that made the rich pay at a rate twelve times that required of the poor; he reorganized the courts on a more popular basis; and arranged that the sons of those who had died in a war for Athens should be brought up at the government’s expense.” Both the rich and the poor complained, but later agreed that Solon had saved Athens from revolution.

The Durants used Rome as an example of societies that tried to avoid redistribution of wealth, and went through long periods of chaos as a result.

Recommendation:

In connection with the wealth inequality issue as it applies to the United States, I suggest Christia Freeland’s article, “The Rise Of The New Global Elite” in the January-February 2011 issue of The Atlantic.
[...]

Will and Ariel Durant are historians that have tackled history as philosophy. This book was finished in 1968. This version includes interviews that expand on each chapter from the authors themselves. A very interesting listen.

One thing I noticed was that most of the chapters and quotes are included in other works by the couple and this is a recap of those early books and more of an explanation and conclusion from those studies.

Some of the subjects: War, Economics, Inequality of wealth, Religion vs. Evolution.

Some of my favorite quotes from this book: "History is mostly guessing; the rest is prejudice"

"Civilization begins with order, grows with liberty and dies with chaos."

"There have been only 268 of the past 3,421 years free of war."

"We Americans are the best informed people on earth as to the events of the last twenty-four hours; we are the not the best informed as the events of the last sixty centuries."

Some of the ideas seemed dated, but for the most part this is an interesting overview of history and a good preface to more in depth study.

Grover Gardner does the narration, never a complaint about his reading.

This is a review of the CD audiobook

Mr. Durant may be little known today (i.e., 2013) but back in the late 1950s and 1960s he was a giant, at least as a “pop” historian. His name was commonly known and his books were best sellers and widely read. He surpassed any “pop” historian writing since the early 1980s.

His writings, as with any writer, had both positives and negatives. One of the positives is that his writings offer a very 1960s perspective into historical perspective, especially given the radical shifts in societal mores that were occurring at the times. One of the driving forces in his book, that captures this, was the view a society’s strength was based on morals, religion belief and faith in one’s own society. Declines in these, in his opinion, foretold the decline of societies, as witnessed by how the decline of these coincided with the decline ancient Greece, Rome and Europe. These, to large degree, he contributed to “secularization”. Unfortunately Mr. Durant, while pointing to how secularization weakened society, did not examine the flip side, which was that secularization and rationality played a very important role in unlocking science with all that it implied (i.e., industrial growth, etc.). It was this that, to a very large extent, enabled the West to supersede other parts of the world in terms of growth, development and power.

Mr. Durant also puts forth a hypothesis of historical development that attempts to explain cyclical booms and busts in civilization growth and collapse in terms of the relative ratios of “productive” to “unproductive” members of society, analogous to Republican nominee’s Mitt Romney’s views on “moochers” and “non-moochers”. When the “unproductive” become relatively numerous to the “productive” societies decline. Unfortunately Mr. Durant does not seem to ask whether or not this is a symptom or cause of a society’s decline. Could there be factors that underlie this change in ratios that is causal in history (i.e., growing concentration of ownership of farmland and increasing debts of farmers, as in Rome in the late stages of its history as a Republic?).

His view of long-term historical development also has some more serious problems. One stems from the fact that institutions are totally ignored. Mr. Durant does not incorporate the development or role of institutions into his view of how societies develop in absolute terms or vis-à-vis each other. There is also no analysis as to why the “Western” world developed while many other parts of the world did not develop. In addition, there is very little on how the development of very large third world nations such as China, India and Brazil would impact the world, in terms of either economics or geopolitics.

With respect to the audiobook version, it is well read and never monotone. In addition, the audiobook includes interviews with the author (after each chapter) that are not included in the hardcopy version of the book. Hence the audiobook permits the author to expound further on the views put forth in each chapter. For this reason this reviewer recommends the audiobook version of the book.

In short, the book has quite a few interesting points and hypotheses but also a number of weaknesses. Nevertheless, it is still worthy to be read even today.

I enjoyed the analysis and conclusions. I read a lot of history and have come to similar conclusions from my own readings and observations.

Writers: Historical facts reflect prejudices, confirmation of pre-conceived ideas, glorification, and simplistic cause/effect when it was complicated and long standing. Some historians write from a contrarian viewpoint to ignite controversy to get fame and money.

Geography: People are drawn to water for settlements and trade. Climate limits farming. In the tropics people pick ripe produce and are docile. In harsh climates produce is supplemented by hunting and fishing. Technology develops. War seizes what is unattainable.

Biology: Freedom vs equality is never ending. There is a limit to the fertility of the soil, seas, and animals.

Race: Individual races do not produce civilizations but civilization can produce a mixed race. Tribal roots are stronger than race. Race is used as an excuse to subjugate others.

Character: Human means and instruments change, but motives and ends remain the same. Both conservative and change have positive and negative impacts.

Morals: They vary due to historical and environmental conditions. Cities destroy family and religious values. Immorality destroys civilizations.

Religion: Provides meaning and dignity for the poorest. It fulfills a desire for miracles, mystery, and myth. When formal religion is rejected, it is replaced with faith-based theory (Capitalism, Socialism, Communism, Monarchy, or Democracy).

Economics: Every system relies on a profit motive. Bankers control men and history. Concentration of wealth is inevitable and results in revolt.

Socialism: Bureaucracies become expensive and corrupt. Capitalism's greed and excesses encourage socialism.

Government: Monarchy has been the most stable. Aristocracy fails because it does not produce good rulers. By the 3rd generation pleasure seeking and ego have replaced responsibility.

War: The result of humans competing. War drives technology and helps keep populations balanced with natural resources.

Growth and Decay: Agriculture evolves to commerce to industry to finance to government to war. Decay results when a minority rejects the concept that the group must benefit for the individual to prosper.

Is Progress Real?: Human nature has not changed. Repeating the past errors with new technology is not progress. Philosophies and counter-philosophies have not provided value to human existence. The contradiction is that complexity and problems generated by mechanization create problems beyond man's ability to solve and that is why civilizations deteriorate to a survival level.

Many people have wished that someone who really knows history would summarize the repeating patterns and give us the conclusions so we would have an idea of how things will work out in the future. This is the best I've seen.

This slim volume is a wonderful survey and recap of The Story of Civilization series. This book alone is full of astounding insights, stunning depth, breathtaking scope and staggering erudition. Another page tuner by Will Durant. I find myself gaining in perspective with each Durant authored book that I have the good fortune to read.

I just finished all 11 volumes of Durant's monumental `Story of Civilization' and re-read this little gem to cap it all off. I found their insights to ring true in most cases, and very well expressed. This was actually written after they finished the 10th volume, but they lived long enough to complete an 11th volume.

This book consists of 13 chapters, each of which could be considered a separate essay. All are tied to history and the topics they cover include geology, biology, race, character, morals, religion, economics, socialism, government, war, and growth & decay. The first chapter is a sort of disclaimer explaining why they are afraid to write this summary (history is an art, not an exact science). The final chapter asks the question `Is Progress Real?' where they bring out several interesting points. All of the essays are thought provoking and seem to be as fresh today as they were when this book was written over 43 years ago.

I highly recommend this book to everyone, even those that have not read a lot of history. I would love to see this little book be required reading for our politicians, since we always see so many of the great mistakes in history being constantly repeated. The lessons are worth learning and reviewing.

This 1968 work is a great example of a truly well educated couple sharing their views on life and philosophy based upon their broad knowledge of human history. In a brief 100 pages, they provide context for all of the big questions and share their conclusions.

Some of the answers are idiosyncratic based on the couple's lifetime and the cold war atmosphere in 1968, but most are applicable today.

In a nutshell, man is a biological animal formed by 10,000+ years as a hunter-gatherer. Competition is innate, and applies at the level of individuals, families, tribes, groups, nations and planets! For 3,000 years, agriculture has provided an environment where some countervailing cooperation in support of group competition is valuable and developed. There is a wide distribution of talents and results in society. The more able produce much more than the less able and consume more. Society needs to reinforce this striving force for its success. Those who produce less will try to limit the producers. This can be overdone and destroy a society. The producers will attempt to consume everything. This can be overdone and destroy a society. Society needs order and liberty. There are cycles between too much order and too much liberty. There is no guarantee that the cycles will be regular or pleasant. A mixed economy may be the best answer. Eventually, all civilizations dissolve. There is a need for religious/philosophical/cultural myths to restrain rampant individualism. Western civilization has lost its Judeo-Christian base and struggles to replace it in a meaningful way.

The Durants' conclusions are not new, but they are a consistent worldview, supported by history. The audio version has extra materials and provides a personal connection with these special historians.

This book by Will and Ariel Durant was written to present what lessons they saw that history teaches us considering what they learned in the writing of their mammoth series, The Story of Civilization. It is truly amazing that they seemed to have pulled this off in only about 100 pages.

The book looks at various "factors" and discusses what history generally has to say about each. These "factors" include morals, religion, economics, government and war.

Not all may agree, but I think the Durants effort here was a success in most respects. I actually laughed out loud at times, because they were often so very right.

Keep in mind however that the book was written in 1968, so it is not always politically correct, and they followed some (then) current trends and (may have)incorrectly predicted the future - like the Catholic Church would increase in influence in the USA and that the communist and capitalist systems might move toward each other and each survive that way. Some might say that the opposite of these two predictions happened, but then maybe we need to wait a little longer. After all, the Hispanic population is growing in the USA and most are Catholic. Also, China is still communist to some extent and becoming more important and market oriented. We'll see, I guess.

Give it a try and see what you think.

This is an ambitious book that should be a capstone to any course in political philosophy. This book seeks to reveal (or at least provoke thinking in the reader) on what history's response would be to the following questions:

1. What is civilization?
2. Are freedom and equality compatible?
3. Is there a God?
4. Are we fortunate/doomed from history repeating itself?
5. In light of all that is known about man, is progress real?

The title would lead one to believe that the author studied history as an unbiased observer and through a highly synthesized process, drew conclusions about the nature of man through a distillation of recurring themes. My personal belief is that this is not the approach taken by the author. Rather, I think that Will Durant was first and foremost, an academic philosopher, inherently biased and has taken a survey of history to rationalize events of the past into some coherency that supports his point of view. To me, it is apparent that Will Durant is a conservative Deist, and more than anyone else, I can imagine Reagan grinning that this book supported his politics. In essense, I am saying that this book is a top down, rather than a bottom up study on history. Why does this matter?

If taken from the point of view that Western history alone can illuminate on the nature of man, I disagree. Instead, I prefer to accept that this book is more valuable towards understanding the significance of the human experience from a Western perspective of "Social Darwinism" and what the experiment of these ideals has revealed through American history, and how this relates to other Western civilization of the past i.e. Greek, Roman and Western European. In many places, Will shares his point of view that taken as a whole, democracy has done more good for the world than any other system (that is of course if you assume America is a democracy, and ignoring the apetite for wars and covert activities throughout its history). Less government is better and widespread literacy has made us a superior country.

To be fair, the book starts off with caveats in which the author concedes to be foolish in attempting to summarize what history says about man and later also reminds the reader that any number of interpretations can be taken from history depending on the citations, in other words even the devil can quote the bible to his own ends. Interestingly, by invoking his own modesty with such caveats the author admits being negative by his own definitions (based on the instincts of Action/Sleep) and in asking that the reader submit to the reality he has outlined, thus in turn demonstrate a negative habit with respect to the fight/flight instinct. In this sense, the book is self-defeating because the book is in some ways an endorsement of the positive aspects of western civilization and modern man's participation within this framework.

On to the book.

The many facets of history that comprise mans heritage include:

1. Geology
2. Biology
3. Race (to the extent that people regard this as a factor, though the author makes an intelligent case against such discrimination in the aggregate sense)
4. Character
5. Morals
6. Religion
7. Economics
8. Government
9. War

I think this is an intriguing set of criteria and I can't say much has been left out, if the survey was a purely analytical view of man. However, I am more inclined to believe that human beings are more emotional than rational and in that regard, the book does not address romantic notions except in terms of the need to procreate. Absent also is any treatment of the individual psychology of self knowledge or consciousness.

There are some very profound statements contained in this book, as the author shares his beliefs that:

* Man, not earth makes civilization
* We are subject to the processes and trials of evolution
* The first rule of biology is that life is competition
* War is a nations way of eating, it promotes co-operation because it is the ultimate form of competition
* That only real emancipation of man is individual
* You can't fool all the people all of the time, but you can fool enough to run a large country (Abe Lincoln)
* If our economy of freedom fails to distribute wealth as ably as it has created it, the road to dictatorship will be open to any man who can persuasively promise security to all
* Freedom and equality are everlasting enemies and when one prevails, the other dies
* If the human brood is too numerous for the food supply, nature has three agents for restoring balance: famine, pestilence and war
* The civilized soul will reveal itself in the treatment of every man and woman as a representative creation of the body of mankind
* Does history support a belief in God? If by God we mean a supreme and intelligent being rather than the creative vitality of nature, the answer is no

This is merely a sample of the topics covered. Given that the book was published in 1968, though flawed in many respects, it is nevertheless valuable in that it helps put our current times into perspective. Doubtless, this book was indicative of the thinking of the policy makers in this country of the 1950s and 60's and we see the world taking shape according to those beliefs. Where the book diverges from reality is the supposition that mastering nature is what defines a civilization. What would Durant say about the way that nature is violently convulsing on mankind's irresponsible exploitations of its sources of energy, that too in support of monarchic regimes?

I have rated the book highly because it is succinct, well written, thought provoking and in many ways accurate. However I would advise any reader to explore a wider selection of reading before accepting all conclusions here at face value.

Honestly, history has always been a subject that bored me, and I was unsure how much I would enjoy and learn from this book. These fears were quickly put to rest, and I was extremely impressed at Durant's rigorous and logic-based apporach to analyzing past civilations. He breaks civilations into three sections: hunting, agricultural, and industrial. He explains how our needs and hence our morals changed with each.

The greatest part of the book is to see our major problems of today: freedom vs. order, capitalism vs. socialism, religion vs. state repeated throughout history. It was an extremely humbling and enlightening experience. I heard the audio version and I highly recommend it since it contains relevant interviews with Wil and Ariel Durant after each chapter.

I would love to see an update of potential consequences as we change from an industrial to information based civilization, and as we develop such ground-altering technologies such as genetic design, artificial intelligence, and inexpensive WMDs.

Ariel Durant (1898-1981) and Will Durant (1885-1981) were two of the most productive historians of the 20th century. Their ten volume work titled THE STORY OF CIVILIZATION is a monument to exhaustive study and research. The Durants wrote THE LESSONS OF HISTORY as a summary of what history can teach. This book examines conflicting interpretations of history and recounts both tragedies and achievements of men from antiquity to contemporary times. Readers should note this book was published in 1968 by Simon and Schuster.

The first chapter of this book alerts readers that history has to be studied carefully and honestly. The Durants were clear that historians have only a partial grasp of the past, and newer discoveries of documents and sources will revise and alter historical interpretations. The study of archeology can help historians with their work. The Durants commented that any fixed interpretation of history will falter because there are complex factors that determine events and thought.

The section of the book dealing with physical events and history is worth consideration. The Durants state the obvious when they discussed how astronomy, climate, drought, floods, earthquakes, etc. resulted not only in the physical destruction of property and people, but these events altered cultural diffusion and caused political violence and disruption. Drought and floods caused migration and at times war and political rebellion. Yet, climate and geographical facts aided and abetted men to advance culturally and technologically. The Durants made an ominous comment when they suggested that an astronomical event such as an astroid could make the study of history or anthing else meaningless.

The section re biology and history is interesting. The Durants were clear that biology is the study of competition between species including men. Wars, political revolutions, etc. are the ultimate competition. Yet, the Durants argued that competition can lead to cooperation and mutual benefit among men.

The Durants did a good job underming the race theory of history. The old canard that the Nordic peoples (Nothern Europe)were the only superior peoples. The Durants cited advanced civilizations in India, China, Egypt, Ancient Greece and Italy, etc. The Durants informed readers that advanced civilizations developed in different areas that had varied climates and resources. The Nothern Europeans may have "conquered" many peoples in Southern Europe, but historically the Northern Europeans were absorbed by the their Southern European counterparts. The Roman Cahtolic Church clergy taught men to read, write, think, etc. Monastic agriclutral advances were adopted. The use of Greek and especially Latin became part of the Northern European scholarship and learning. Trade, war, intellectual discourse, etc. resulted in "The Market Place of Ideas.'

The Durants also realized that character is part of historical studies. Character traits among savages and barbarians were aggressive, violent, etc. Yet such character traits among civilized men were usually condemned. Men engaged in agriculture and trade needed peace and cooperation. Men who lived in agricultural enshrined the family, and close family relationships were necessary for agricultural survival and prosperity. Yet, the Industrial Revolution undermined such "family values" due to migration to factory and mill towns where the watchful eyes of neighbors were useless.

The section re religion and history was interesting. Science and technology undermined what some may call religious superstition, and the gods or God were dethroaned. The Durants were not seriously religious people, but they applauded religion as a cohesive force and as a break on crime and violence. Men feard God's wrath more than "The Long Arm of the Law." The Durants missed a golden opportunity. The Medieval Catholic Scholastics and later Catholic scholars did considered work re science, mathematics, and technology. Some of their studies were done no doubt to understand "The Mysteries of God and His Creation." Yet, their achievements were exceptional.

The transition from history and religion to economics should cause intelligent readers to re-evaltuate historical assumptions. The modern debate of Capitalism vs. Socialism is not so modern. The Anceint Sumerians, Egyptians, Greeks ect. had governemnt controlled production and distribution especially of food. There was always political tension between the "haves vs. the have nots" The Durants cited historical examples of the Ancient Chinese, Romans, etc. who catered to the "have nots" to prevent political rebellion. Some of the Ancients used what is called a "war economy" socialism to keep order and to defend their turf from invades such as Diocletioan (c 284-304 AD). The Durants commented that during modern history, the socialists have granted more individual freedom in fear of the capitalists. The capitalists have catered to socialist measures in fear of the Socialists. There has never been a pure capitalist or a pure socialist system. Reality and practiality have interferred with such utopias.

The arbiter between the "haves and have nots" has been government and law. Political institutions and concepts such as monarchy, aristocracy, etc. have been a part of history much logner than "democracy." A majority of men rarely determine poltical power because of lack of organization and purpose. Political power has always been a balance between coercion and freedom. The Durants argued that freedom is defined by its limitations to prevent chaos and the rise of a dictator. The Durants used examples from Ancient History (China, the Greeks, and the Romans)whereby floods and droughts undermined the best laid plans of poltical rulers. Economic prosperity and peace were ruined by Mother Nature. Political rivals used these natural disasters to undermine their opponents. Yet, government authority usually maintained peace and harmony.

Along with government, war has obviously affected history. In fact, war is the ultimate government activity. The Durants reported that war during Early Modern European History was limited to the royalty. Residents of both factions could visit each other and engage in cultural exchange and trade. Yet, the 20th. century has changed all of that. The 20th. century has been the bloodiest century in history with mass looting,rape, brutality, mass murder, and extinction of innocent unarmed civilians. The Durants suggested that the existence of mega weapons which can insure the destruction of both sides in a total war may put the breaks of war. Trade and intellectual transfers may reduce the lure of total war. Had this book been written later, the Durants could have cited the wicked Communist such as the Vietnamese and Chinese who became U.S. trade partners. Whether or not the mass destruction of war will be muted only time will tell.

War and other events can cause what some call "growth and decay." Yet, the Durants show that while the Ancient Greeks and Romans are no longer hold such important political and intellectual prowess, their achienvements have outlasted their civilization. Men have benefitted from the achievements of the Ancients and carry these achievements throughout the world. Trade and geography can alter political and economic conditions, but achievement is not confined to any place or time.

The Durants conclude this book with a comment on "progress," whatever progress means. Medical marvels and abundant food in Western Europe and the U.S. have prolonged life. Yet, science and technology have produced weapons that can eradicate centuries of civilzation and achievements. This realization may influence men to act rationally and not impulsively. The importance of the this book and historical studies is that we are almost less than human and not civilized without historical reference. Men rely on history whether they realize it or not.

The book is thoughtful. Will Durant has been accused of being a "leftist" whatever that means because he was a socialist. This is a non sequitor. Many men were socialists and communists when they were younger, but they matured. In fact Will Durant stated that socialism/communism were too often code words for a lust of power. The Durants certainly did not have an economic determinist view of history. In fact, Durant wrote a piece titled THE TRAGEDY OF RUSSIA re the Bolshevik Revolution. The Durants revised some of their work as more knowledge was gained. In spite of political name calling, this is an interesting book.

Fascinating and worthwhile. An essential read for the classical education. In this slim volume, the Durants distill the essential lessons found in their generously detailed, authoritative histories The Story of Civilization By Will Durant Complete 11 Volumes (Hardcover 1963-1975) (The Story of Civilization, Volumes 1 to 11): the fundamental principles of political systems based on observable human behavior and motivation. Will Durant remarks, as have others, that human behavior and motivation have not changed throughout human history, rather that only human circumstances have changed as knowledge and invention have accumulated. The Durants' discussions draw clear parallels between present and past developments and uncannily anticipate present developments. The audio version of The Lessons of History includes several interviews with Will and Ariel Durant. Provides an interesting adjunct and counterpoint to Rufus Fears' series on Ancient Greeks and Ancient Romans (The Teaching Company).

This book is a swift collection of fascinating ideas. It reminds me of Jacques Barzun's From Dawn to Decadence: 500 Years of Western Cultural Life 1500 to the Present in its ability to draw ideas from the famous events and characters of history. Since it is so quick, one isn't able to follow the roots of the ideas that surface like one might with Barzun. One must take the author's word for a lot of his conclusions. But, the thoughts stimulated from this survey are quite rewarding nonetheless. Those concepts, as identified by the chapter headings, on nature, biology, race, character, morals, religion, economics, socialism, government, war, growth and decay, and progress, amount to the great concepts of human existence. Anyone interested in being human will thoroughly enjoy this book.

As a first introduction to the work of the Durant's, this is definitely a captivating and a thought provoking collection of essays - everything from role of environment in development of civilizations, to role of famine and wars in regulating the development of civilizations, to role of religion and family. The one-on-one interviews interspersed throughout the book are especially interesting since they provide additional context into the carefully crafted essays.

As Will Durant pointed out himself at the beginning of the book, "much of history is guessing, and the rest is prejudice". Given that the essays and the interviews were recorded at the height of the Cold War, it is remarkable to see how much our views and prejudices have shifted in a short span of half a century. Great read, and I'm looking forward to further exploring Durant's work.

The Durants have a literary style all their own. They smoothely incorporate knowledge and ideas from other nonhistorical disciplines when ranging over the annals of human history. Sometimes they descend into nonsense distinctions such as the "greats" versus the rest of humanity (who just did not quite make it). They perceptively note the dramatic impact of technology on Western society, though are short on examples of its disadvantages (for which there are many, subtle, and scary alike). Overall a well written and arranged compendium from one of the best observers of history, ancient and modern.

This book exemplifies why academia dislikes Durant. He makes vast amounts of knowledge accessible to the layman. Over the course of 13 essays, Durant gets across some of the most important themes of history. Not only is this valuable tothe historian and dabbler in history, as hobby, but also the middle school and high school student. This is a book my children will read for the sake of understanding, in a rough sketch, the human condition, as it has existed in the past.

Dynamically written, and fleshed out with wit, this is a book for the ages!

Will and Ariel Durant were to history what Carl Sagan was to science: They breathed life into a subject considered lifeless by too many, and clothed the skeleton of recorded history in a garment rich in colorful detail and vast in perspective. "Lessons Of History" is, in my opinion, the finest 100 page non-fiction book ever written, and represents the capstone and encapsulating work of two authors who gave the world their ten thousand page "Story Of Civilization" over a period of 50 years.
Within this delightful book, one can view the enormous panorama of human civilization as it developed from, and was formed by, the matrices of geography, religion, science, war, and a host of other factors. The Durant's, in a writing style that should have been copyrighted, provide the reader with an engaging view of humanity that few readers will come away from without being touched and awed. To be sure, the Durant's works have had a few (very few) detractors, but they were almost entirely high-browed academics in narrow research areas who most likely envied them their commercial success. If I could give this synopsis of 100 centuries of history more than 5 stars I'd do it in a nanosecond.

After finishing the ten volumes of "The History of Civilization", Will and Ariel Durant went back revising and taking notes from their monumental work and produced this insightful essay.
The goal was not to summarize 3,421 years of recorded history in a hundred pages. That would have been silly. The goal was to give some thought to what means to study history; how important is to know our heritage; can we understand our nature and the relations between individuals or between groups or nations just by analysing the past; can the acumulated human experience tell us where are we heading to?
The book was first published in 1968, the worse phase of the cold war, when any perspective of future seemed rather dark and the uncertainties of the period certainly permeate the book.
The book might be considered biased and conservative but that is fair game since the authors warn us about that on the first chapter, "Hesitations". "Historian are not free from bias and prejudice", they say and "most history is guessing, and the rest is prejudice".
The book was written with great care. The sentences are powerful, elegant, concise and insightful. It brings noteworthy quotes and is itself very quotable. A book to be read and appreciated several times.
Leonardo Alves - January 2001

"The rise, success, decline, and fall of a civilization depend upon the inherent quality of the race."

"Hence the superiority of the whites in the US and Canada (who didn't intermarry with Indians) to the whites in Latin America (who did). Only those who are themselves the product of such enfeebling mixtures talk of the equality of races, or think that "all men are brothers".

"All strong characters and peoples are race conscious, and are instinctively averse to marriage outside their own racial group"

This book is despicable.

For the person in a hurry, but who is also curious about history, I would recommend this book. It is the culmination of a survey of history that Will and Ariel Durrant did in the 1960's. I realize that some of the conclusions have been dated, such as concern about the Soviet Union, but that does not destroy the value of the work. Indeed, who is to say that the Soviet Union, or some neo-Tsarist regime, could not rise again?
Moreover, this book covers other topics, all of them revolving around the "Human Predicament," which is basically a choice between freedom and security. Or better yet, actual freedom, and claimed security, since if you chose security over freedom, you will lose both freedom and security.
This book is an easy read, written on the high-school level, so there are no excuses for not understanding anything. It is an essential in anyone's collection of "Great Books," since not only is the unexamined life not worth living, the unexamined civilization is not worth preserving. And we can make a change in things.

Here, their "Story of Civilization" (11 volumes) gets distilled into an operator's manual to rush out and rescue the significance of life on the planet. 100 of the best pages ever framed in English. IF history indeed speaks to the value of mankind, the Durants grab our eyes and ears, compel our minds to a better adjudication and allow us to master the age-old themes that have rocked the ages.
This is a quick read and a deeper re-read. It may be the best manual for Advanced Placement History Essay writing and analysis. Would that the current crop of dithering, skeptical, deconstructed historians, economists, warriors religionists and politicians read it again and again!
Try this--on economics and history: "concentration of wealth is ...inevitable, and periodically alleviated by violent or peaceable (1933-52 and 1960-65) partial redistribution...a heartbeat...a vast systole and diastole of concentrating wealth and compulsive recirculation." p.57 And--on progress: "...WE are born to a richer heritage, and man rises in proportion as he receives it." p. 102.
"The Lessons" capture thinking that stands on the shoulders of two millenia of reflection and action, and the words are captured in imaginative precision and inspiring beauty! Must reading!

The Durant's show us that of all we might learn from History;the one thing it can't do is to help us predict the future.Even the Durant's were tempted to try in 1968 to predict the impact that lower birth rates would have in the US {see pg 23} totally missed the mark.They also had no insight into the collapse of Communism especially the speed.I do not fault them on this .Maybe they made these points to show how futile prediction really is despite an in depth knowledge of History.I think their line "There is no certainty that the future will repeat th past.Every year is an adventure" {pg 88}.

To my regret, this book sat on my shelf for over 40 years while I spent 30 years as a field artilleryman with 12 years overseas including a combat tour in Vietnam followed by 13 years as a high school history teacher. After my second "retirement," I began sorting through my library and came across this slim volume. Of course, the authors' names were well-known to me. The Durants' insights are absolutely timeless. My only criticism deals with their comments on the Soviet Union. Of course, in 1968, they had no way of knowing that end of that system was just over 20 years away. Every serious student of history must read this book.

My teacher played us the tapes of "The Lessons of History" by Will Durant. At first my classmates and I did not enjoy listening and taking notes because we didn't completely understand it....but then mmy teacher would stop the tape and we would go over our notes and discuss it. This really made me understand what Durant was talking about and I agree with alot of the inferences that he made. Durant's essay's are a great way to provoke discussions at the begining of the year to get your class ready to share their ideas with the class all year.

I've listened to this audio recording at least a dozen times. It gets better each time. The interviews are particularly interesting because the listener gets to hear his spontaneous responses to questions. I loved when, in an interview, he said that 'a society run by intellectuals would commit suicide rapidly.' Also, his defined an intellectual as 'a person who mistakes ideas for reality.' His wife took issue with that particular point during the interview. It is a great audio book. One might take issue with some of his 'suggestions' at the end - very 'politically incorrect.'

The Durants obviously enjoyed their careers as historians, and have written a fine book, expressing their critical thinking, short but meaty. I find it a help in looking at modern political situations, as well as when trying to comprehend the ramifications of such issues as geographic situation, weather, education, race, etc. on national and international events.
The Durants had written detailed expansive histories of many major national movements, and wanted to see what generalizations they could draw from a lifetime of research. Whether you agree with every conclusion they make, you will find the issues intriguing. The Durants are not Politically Correct. Their approach is Darwinian: not what's right or wrong, but what succeeds in the face History's pressures. Their interest is not in what ought to be, but what has been- in fact.
If the idea that one is doomed to repeat history if one ignores it, then this is a good book for stimulating thought and insight. Wonderful book.

This is a beautifully written summary of brilliant observations on history, by one of the few writers in the English language who really knows how to make history come alive. A satisfying coda to the eleven volumes of The Story of Civilization.

I tried reading THE STORY OF CIVILIZATION by the Durants years ago, but I only got a few chapters into the first of eleven thick volumes before giving up. We're talking 14,000 pages here. I prefer short, concise books. That's one reason I like THE LESSONS OF HISTORY, a smart 100-page distillation of Will and Ariel's massive work. It's well written, well edited, and presents insights into our human history not matched by more recent works. The observations on such topics as race, religion, and war are made with courage and honesty. An important, worthwhile book.

In about 100 pages you get Will and Ariel Durant's idea of history boiled down to the essentials. You get the big conclusions without having to read thousands of pages. Page 88 has two good examples of what they have learned about history: "History repeats itself, but only in outline and in the large."... and ... "There is no certainty that the future will repeat the past. Every year is an adventure." And as to finding the meaning of existence from history -- that's for the readers to find out for themselves. A realistic view of history.

I'm sure the authors are eloquent people but I found it very difficult to make sense of what they were attempting to portray. I felt I was at the University being lectured by four-star professors who assumed my IQ was over 200?

Could not grasp it but I'll try again!

The Lessons of History is a masterpiece. It’s short, pithy, and full of wisdom. Reading it is like sitting at the feet of a master storyteller who unravels the wisdom of thousands of years of human history in a condensed fashion. You come away feeling wiser, happier, and more connected with humanity. You see the forest and, for the moment, you are not as concerned with the trees. You are standing at the mountaintop. Your vision is vast and grand. Your heart is all embracing; all the petty thoughts vanish into oblivion.

Read it. Imbibe it. Be wiser and happier.

Will and Ariel Durant wrote a massive eleven-volume history, The Story of Civilization. After they finished volume ten -- which was to be the last - they came out with this brief work. (In 1975 they produced the final volume in the series, The Age of Napoleon). Although this series is not considered by professional historians to be a great work of history, the Durants' love of history is evident on every page. I read most of them in high school and college, and they help inspire a life-long interest history.
The Lessons of History consists of a number of short chapters, in which the Durants summarize what their study of history revealed on various themes, such as war, morals, government, religion, etc. Although certainly not a profound work, it contains a number of insights. For example, the discussion of the lineage of communism is quite interesting. On the other hand, the Durants strike me as having been moderately left of center, and some of their arguments in favor of government regulation of the economy don't convince me. They appear somewhat more conservative on morals, and there is a good discussion on how war negatively impacts traditional morality. The discussion of religion is somewhat ambiguous, perhaps reflecting Will Durant, who studied for the priesthood, became an atheist, and died an agnostic.
This work came out in 1968, and the Durants make a couple of predictions which didn't exactly come true. They argue that by 2000 the Roman Catholic Church will be politically dominant in the US. In addition, they expressed the commonplace idea in the 60s that the Soviet Union and the United States were coming closer together and would eventually meet in the middle.

I tried reading THE STORY OF CIVILIZATION by the Durants years ago, but I only got a few chapters into the first of eleven thick volumes before giving up. We're talking 14,000 pages here. I prefer short, concise books. That's one reason I like THE LESSONS OF HISTORY, a smart 100-page distillation of Will and Ariel's massive work. It's well written, well edited, and presents insights into our human history not matched by more recent works. The observations on such topics as race, religion, and war are made with courage and honesty. An important, worthwhile book.

In about 100 pages you get Will and Ariel Durant's idea of history boiled down to the essentials. You get the big conclusions without having to read thousands of pages. Page 88 has two good examples of what they have learned about history: "History repeats itself, but only in outline and in the large."... and ... "There is no certainty that the future will repeat the past. Every year is an adventure." And as to finding the meaning of existence from history -- that's for the readers to find out for themselves. A realistic view of history.

I'm sure the authors are eloquent people but I found it very difficult to make sense of what they were attempting to portray. I felt I was at the University being lectured by four-star professors who assumed my IQ was over 200?

Could not grasp it but I'll try again!

The Lessons of History is a masterpiece. It’s short, pithy, and full of wisdom. Reading it is like sitting at the feet of a master storyteller who unravels the wisdom of thousands of years of human history in a condensed fashion. You come away feeling wiser, happier, and more connected with humanity. You see the forest and, for the moment, you are not as concerned with the trees. You are standing at the mountaintop. Your vision is vast and grand. Your heart is all embracing; all the petty thoughts vanish into oblivion.

Read it. Imbibe it. Be wiser and happier.

Will and Ariel Durant wrote a massive eleven-volume history, The Story of Civilization. After they finished volume ten -- which was to be the last - they came out with this brief work. (In 1975 they produced the final volume in the series, The Age of Napoleon). Although this series is not considered by professional historians to be a great work of history, the Durants' love of history is evident on every page. I read most of them in high school and college, and they help inspire a life-long interest history.
The Lessons of History consists of a number of short chapters, in which the Durants summarize what their study of history revealed on various themes, such as war, morals, government, religion, etc. Although certainly not a profound work, it contains a number of insights. For example, the discussion of the lineage of communism is quite interesting. On the other hand, the Durants strike me as having been moderately left of center, and some of their arguments in favor of government regulation of the economy don't convince me. They appear somewhat more conservative on morals, and there is a good discussion on how war negatively impacts traditional morality. The discussion of religion is somewhat ambiguous, perhaps reflecting Will Durant, who studied for the priesthood, became an atheist, and died an agnostic.
This work came out in 1968, and the Durants make a couple of predictions which didn't exactly come true. They argue that by 2000 the Roman Catholic Church will be politically dominant in the US. In addition, they expressed the commonplace idea in the 60s that the Soviet Union and the United States were coming closer together and would eventually meet in the middle.

The quality of erudition is par excellence and rarely a book gives its reader the joy of reading as this book does. This book examines history through different lenses such as biology, war, economy, character, etc and the essence of observation is very intuitive and enriching. In some parts, the book goes into historical incidents to set the premise for the observations which I thought was way too dry for someone like me who is more interested in the lessons of history rather then the history itself.

This is the most important book in my extensive library. I was so impressed by it the first time I read it shortly after its publication in 1968 that I have made a tradition of rereading it every New Year's Day. I gave copies of it to each of my five children and advised them to follow in my habit of rereading it each year.
Rereading this book each year refreshes my perspective on the often perplexing issues that the media spins before me every day, allowing me to concentrate and understand better the issues most meaningful in my daily life and behavior.
I am at this website because I am ordering copies for those of my grandchildren now in high school. I can think of nothing that I can give them more valuable than the insights, perspectives, and wisdom in this book.
Litera scripta manet.

The fruit of more than 50 years of labour for all of us to savour.In less than 150 pages the author has condensed lessons drawn from the entire course of human history.The language and style is typical of Mr. Durant and is a pleasure to read. Recommended for all students of history as it will deepen understanding of mankind's past and enlighten our present. A true classic.

How are you today?

This book talks about the lessons of mankind and what can we learn from them. Every time I read this book I really like to imagine it as a 5000 years old man with lots of insights about Life and Humanity in general. Some of the key ideas are:

1. Life is competition
2. The traits of human kind
3. The history of economics
... and others insights from my favourite historian "Will Durant". Happy reading!

A concise overview of the causes and effects of various aspects of humanity over the course of history. I especially like the looks at economics, socialism, government, and morals. It's chock full of heady quotes. It's also a quick read with each chapter being only 10ish pages. Keep in mind that it is somewhat dated; being written in the late 60s, the essays abound with references to that era such as the Communist threat and loose morals (hippies and free love). Overall, it's an insightful, mostly unbiased look at the human condition over the millennia that people have been recording it.

In one of the interviews that serve as interludes between the chapters of his book, Will Durant says he started his career as a liberal and became more & more conservative during his fifty year career as a historian. If he was a conservative, he was a rather liberal one. Some of the ideas he voices would be anathema to conservatives. E.g. Wealth concentrated into fewer and fewer hands should be redistributed to the have nots. Liberals on the other hand, would be distressed by other of his views. E.g. Once the wealth gets redistributed, government should not attempt to prevent the talented and industrious from re-accumulating it.

The paradox is not really paradoxical at all. Obscene wealth in the hands of a very few causes unrest (and eventually revolution) among the obscenely poor. On the other hand, if industry and talent are not rewarded, culture stagnates. Durant gives the fall of the Roman Republic as an example of an obscenely rich aristocracy committing political suicide by refusing to peacefully redistribute some of their wealth to the poor. The economic stagnation of Communist East Europe serves as an example of what happens when you stop the natural flow of wealth back to the talented and industrious.

Durant makes some statements that would get him lynched in the 21st Century American media. E.g. "Only those who are below average really want equality."

Durant is probably most accurately classified as an agnostic, but he says that on balance, religion has done far more good than harm for civilization. Durant contends that civilizations and cultures decline and die when they lose their moral compass. And they lose their moral compass when they lose their religion. Simply put, those contemplating crime are more likely to be detered by the wrath of God than the long arm of the law.

Durant voices many other thought-provoking opinions. You may not agree with everything he says (his wife doesn't), but you will certainly be stimulated to deep thought by what he says.

I was somewhat amused by the interviews interspersed among the chapters. The reverential awe shown by Durant's interviewer was quite neatly counterbalanced by the sardonic wit of Durant's wife, Ariel. When Durant said something she didn't agree with, she let you know about it and gave excellent reasons for her disagreement. Durant quite wisely did what any intelligent husband would do. He almost always let her have the last word.

Will and Ariel Durant tried to bring Philosophy and an understanding of History to the common man and woman. They succeeded admirably, and some thirty years after reading this book I still turn to it in order to understand events occurring around me. This is no scholarly tome, but an invaluable manual for those seeking a better understanding of the world around us. It should be compulsory reading for all those aspiring to public office.

"... only a fool would try to compress a hundred centuries into a hundred pages of hazardous conclusions. We proceed." -- Will and Ariel Durant

Essentially a short book (or longish essay) of musings about culture, religion, and government by the Durants based on their years of research and writing for the massive 10-volume History of Civilization. Unfortunately their vast knowledge did not seem to help them understand or accept the cultural upheavals of the 60's and the early signs of globalization... the book feels extremely dated now in parts, especially their observations on the superiority of the northern European races, the supposed effects of immigration and mixing, and the role and future of the Roman Catholic Church.

This book is an almost impossibly concise summary of the human condition. It covers everything, to a level of detail that tantalises the reader, enticing them to read further into the text, and more by the same author(s). It is an excellent introduction to history and the philosophy of history. An absolute must for any serious historian, or anyone with a heathly interest in the subject.

The book in 102 pages provided the most thoughtful and thought provoking insight into history I have ever read. Any person that believes that the lessons of history can, and should be used to shape government policy needs to read this book.

The premise of this book is based on the idea that we can develop a worldview from looking back on history. I don't agree that this is the case. Our worldview rests on our experiences and our values. History is like the future; it contains an infinite number of possibilities. When we weave history into a comprehensible narrative, we're selecting fodder to support or refute a worldview. But history just is. Ultimately, it's not a willing party in each of our schemes.

To get specific, Durant claims that history is the story of competition. And yet it is just as much the story of cooperation. Or maybe even of indifference. It's all based on the values of the historian.

Just as stock traders say, past performance has little relationship with future returns. Things happened a certain way in the past [most of which isn't recorded or known]. They will happen similarly and differently in the future, in ways we can't predict.

History does have utility. If you work in finance, learning about the history of finance can help you understand the present arrangement of things. But history can't decide our values for us, and determining our values might be the most important aspect of our lives.

The first thing to understand about this book is that it was written by -old people-. By this, I don't even mean that they were chronologically enhanced; more that they were trapped by that inflexible mindset which places tradition and an intense desire for belonging above a natural exploration of reality.

The Durants were either intelligent people trying to reconcile their minds to the demands of the culture in which they were raised, or abject liars attempting to politick their way onto the bookshelves of the prosaic postwar generation of American public. The doublespeak and contradictory statements make the book read like a Kerry speech.

One can't simultaneously say that greed and hoarding are positive human behaviors and praise the charitable throughout history for their generosity, or say that fear and respect for one's elders goes hand in hand with true creativity and individuality. This isn't thinking, it's highly-skilled, well-educated apery of thought.

In the same way that they say statistics will be used to support any point, it would seem that 5,000 years of chaotic human behavior may be used in the same manner. Like anything created by mainstream Western, Judeo-Christian culture, this book seeks only to preserve the foundations upon which it was built.

Had a few great epiphanies reading this book. Will understands history like perhaps noone else. You can clearly see his socialistic viewpoints in the pages though, as well as some anti-racial propaganda with nothing to back up his claims. That was the disappointment. But all in all, it's definitely a book I recommend you to read.

Terribly disappointing take on race as a factor in success of a civilization. Down right unenlightened and offensive. I had to have my husband read parts to make sure I was not reading it wrong. I’m afraid it make me question all Durant’s previous work.

Great book by gifted thinkers and authors. Very big ideas boiled down into timeless and easy to understand essays. This is an important precursor to any serious pursuit of history, whether for plain old history buffs or, more importantly, students pursuing historical study.