Millennial Persons and Anonymous Inventors

Millennial Persons and Anonymous Inventors

The other day our Lamb person, Harry Trumbore, dropped by

and remarked that he enjoyed my recent column on living for a

long time. My response was “What are you talking about?”

Finally, I remembered the piece on the possibility of an infinite life

at a vastly reduced pace written just the week before. Now, as I

approach my 72nd birthday next month, it seems that the concept

of having to forget a thought to think a thought is all too realistic!

I”m beginning to think that our ultimate evolution will indeed be

to repeat the past ad infinitum.

Speaking of the past, a two-part series on A&E cable a few

weeks ago picked the “persons” of the millennium. The program

consisted of a reverse countdown from the 100th down to number

one, the most important person of the millennium. If you didn”t

see the programs, I suggest you come up with your own

candidates before reading the final paragraphs of this column. My

own choices prior to watching the program were Einstein,

Churchill and Galileo. Harry Smith, the narrator, warned the

selections might be controversial.

Emboldened by this audacious effort to select 100 out of

thousands of worthy candidates, I thought I would try something

similar, in response to a suggestion from a reader of this column.

Accordingly, here are my thoughts on the most important

inventions of mankind, ever. The nice thing about this endeavor

is that I can just wing it and not do any research on the subject.

Furthermore, the handful of inventions I”ve come up with are the

inventions of someone whose name will never be known (if

indeed he or she even had a name).

To begin, there”s the obligatory subject of fire. I feel that the

most important contribution was made by our ancestor who first

applied fire to make certain foods more palatable, the invention of

cooking. I just read an item in November”s Discover magazine

reporting a rather startling hypothesis about the significance of

cooking. Roughly 2 million years ago, our primate ancestors

began to pair up as couples and also began shrinking their jaws

and teeth to more closely resemble us modern types. At the same

time, the females, who were more diminutive relative to the

males, started growing larger. Discover reports that Richard

Wrangham and Greg Laden, of Harvard and the University of

Minnesota, respectively, attribute all this activity to cooked

vegetables! Their hypothesis is that smaller jaws and teeth

resulted from the more tender heat-treated roots no longer

requiring such vigorous chewing. Furthermore, the introduction

of cooking increased the delay between “harvesting” and eating,

allowing more time for theft of the food from the females by the

males. The postulated result is that the coupling of males and

females in a cooperative fashion was advantageous to the females

who, I would imagine, would employ whatever seductive ploys

necessary to attain this objective.

If true, cooking led to a second major invention, marriage.

Admittedly, it was marriage considerably less formal in nature

than today. All this leads me to propose my own hypothesis

concerning the current decline in the institution of marriage in our

society. Today, it seems that huge numbers of us are either eating

out, ordering in or simply microwaving previously packaged

culinary treats. My suggestion is that, if the invention of cooking

produced marriage, doesn”t the demise of cooking within the

marriage promote its disintegration? Just a thought. Could

Martha Stewart be the one to turn this whole thing around? I

read that in Silicon Valley there is an increasing involvement in

gardening and more cooking going on. And I”ve just received

another of many solicitations for funds from the VFW. Instead of

the usual return address stickers or the annual calendar, what

should be enclosed but a small cookbook of holiday recipes!

In my first column for this Web site, I explained that Allen F.

Bortrum is actually a nom de plume. I learned recently that

Mozart”s name was originally Joannes Chrisostomus Wolfgang

Gottlieb Mozart. You can hardly blame him when, at about the

age of 14, he began calling himself Wolfgang Amadeo, only to

change that about 7 years later to Wolfgang Amade (with a

backwards accent over the “e”). Which brings me to my third

major invention, the name. It seems plausible to me that the name

was invented around the time of cooking and marriage and that

the first name was given by the inventor to himself or herself.

Admittedly, the first name might not have sounded too

sophisticated, perhaps just a distinctive grunt or growl. I should

think that closely connected to the invention of the name was

another very important invention, the pronoun, in particular, the

words “I”, “you” and “it”. Again, the pronoun might have been

just a pounding of the chest for “I”, etc. Out of the inventions of

the name and the pronoun and the characterization of one”s self

and others as having unique identities, must have followed an

eventual search for answers to the fundamental questions of life

such as origins, future, rudimentary technology, etc.

Certainly, the invention, or perhaps more accurately, evolution of

structured, more complex language with verbs and adjectives was

a key to everything else that followed. My candidates for the first

adjectives would be “good” and “bad” and “want”, “give”, “love”

and “eat” for the verbs. What do you think? One thing for sure –

nobody will ever know the correct answers!

The invention of the alphabet can be pinned down a little more

precisely, although we”ll never know the name of the inventor(s).

Quite by chance, I stopped writing my column at this point due to

a sudden failure of my keyboard to communicate with my

computer, which I had to turn off without the recommended

graceful shutdown. Frustrated, I decided to read the Sunday New

York Times and, coincidentally, on the front page was a long

article reporting new evidence that the alphabet arose in Egypt,

invented by Semites living in Egypt around 1800-1900 BC. This

is a few hundred years earlier than the prevailing consensus,

which is that the Semites had developed the alphabet outside

Egypt, but under the influence of the Egyptian pictographic

writing.

The current thinking, based on the new findings, is that the

Semites in Egypt were illiterate alien workers who would have

had to spend years learning the complex Egyptian hieroglyphics.

Speculation is that the Semites developed abbreviated forms of

these hieroglyphs, the abbreviations evolving into an alphabet. I

can certainly understand their approach by looking at the daunting

complexity of today”s Chinese pictographic writing system. The

invention of writing itself is credited to the Sumerians over a

thousand years earlier but the Times article said there is

controversy as to whether the Egyptians actually predated the

Sumerians. Both used the pictographs.

Certainly, a seminal invention occurred when someone first

deliberately planted a seed in order to harvest a morsel or so of

food. This invention of farming enabled a more reliable food

supply and an expansion of the variety of foods deemed to be

edible. The farming life would seem to have promoted the idea of

marriage and family, with the both the shared work and the

shared bounty. As with cooking, the decline in the number of

family farms, with increasingly urban lifestyles, has seen

increasing problems maintaining the close knit family ties.

I group three major inventions together because that is the

common context. They are, of course, wine, women and song.

The process of fermentation is at least 5,000 years old, practiced

in the Middle East, but I”d be willing to bet that someone must

have discovered the extra benefits of the alcoholic beverage prior

to that time. The consumption of wine or other spirits in some

parts of the world was actually a very positive health measure due

to the corrupted water supplies. Certainly among travelers today,

the consumption of beer, wine or soft drinks in certain areas is a

prudent alternative to drinking the water.

As for the invention of women, we men all know that they were

created from one of our ribs about 6,000 years ago. Source: the

Kansas Board of Education. I admit that there are some skeptics

who actually think that women had to coexist with men in earlier

times, if only to avoid the idea that the men were capable of

reproduction without the benefit of sex. I certainly would not

want to get involved in such a strange notion!

To my way of thinking, putting women at the top of the list as far

as inventions are concerned, song is a close second. The sound of

music is certainly an invention that has contributed immensely to

the enrichment of human existence. Whoever found that a hollow

wooden or bone tube with holes in it produced sounds of differing

pitch gets my credit for inventing music. This event occurred at

least 25,000 years ago, based on a bone flute found in France.

Actually, I should have said instrumental music and I realize that

somewhere along the line very early, a mother must have crooned

to her baby. OK, she gets credit for inventing music itself. The

sound of music will always remind me of seeing one of my first

Broadway plays, which happened to have that very title. I can

still remember the chills that went through me when Mary Martin

came on stage. Without uttering a sound she was music,

radiating a compelling stage presence the likes of which I have

not seen since.

An overlooked invention of great importance is gambling. Who

was the first to say to his fellow Neanderthal or whatever, “I”ll bet

you my ax against your spear that you can”t bring home a

mastodon for dinner tonight.” The introduction of the word “bet”

into language must be the precursor to today”s lotteries, casinos,

and of greatest significance to all of us, the stock market.

In this era of HMOs and money-losing hospitals, I must give

thanks to the first individual who successfully treated someone

else”s wound by whatever method available and actually made that

person better. This invention of medicine was great but, having

had surgery for a leg broken playing golf over a year ago, I give

my personal vote of thanks to a much later invention, anesthesia.

I know that this is a pretty modern invention, out of spirit with

my list to this point, but I can”t forget the first time I saw

depictions of Civil War surgeries, including amputations,

performed without benefit of anesthetics.

I”ve barely touched the surface of major inventions but space-time

has run out. Now for A&E”s person of the millennium. First, my

own choices, Einstein, Churchill and Galileo were in the list,

numbers 8, 52 and 10, respectively. The most important person

of the millennium was not a scientific genius or a major political

figure, but rather a tinkerer of sorts with a persistent mechanical

bent. Perhaps you”ve noted that my inventions are primarily

slanted towards language and communication. Well, the person

of the millennium was Johann Gutenberg, inventor of the printing

press. It was the feeling of the A&E panel that, without his

invention, the spread of ideas, literature, news, art, music, etc.

throughout the world would never have been possible to the

extent that happened.

In case you”re curious, the top 25 in A&E”s selection, in order,

were Gutenberg, Isaac Newton, Martin Luther, Charles Darwin,

William Shakespeare, Christopher Columbus, Karl Marx,

Einstein, Nicolaus Copernicus, Galileo Galilei, Leonardo da

Vinci, Sigmund Freud, Louis Pasteur, Thomas Edison, Thomas

Jefferson, Adolf Hitler, Mahatma Gandhi, John Locke,

Michelangelo, Adam Smith (not today”s Adam Smith!), George

Washington, Genghis Kahn, Abraham Lincoln, Saint Thomas

Aquinas and James Watt. Certainly an illustrious and influential

group. Some of the individuals would probably be very surprised

to see themselves in their particular grouping, e.g., Hitler

sandwiched between Jefferson and Gandhi. For you music lovers,

Mozart, Bach and Beethoven were in the next five, along with

Henry Ford and Napoleon Bonaparte. I certainly disagree

strongly with the placement of Elvis in 57th place, above FDR,

Joan of Arc, Walt Disney, Heisenberg, Ronald Reagan and

Picasso, among others. But hey, maybe it”s just a generational

thing; I did say I was going to be 72.

Allen F. Bortrum