Today I went on a great journey to the Sterling Library archives room. There, we got a chance to look at old lecture notes and class notes from Yale professors and students of the nineteenth century. A great many of these lectures start with lofty rumination on the nature and origins of science, which often mention, in vague terms, “the ancients.” As the students and professors of 1800s Yale would have us believe, ancient people were ignorant and their information inaccurate and imprecise. It’s a kind of cultural chauvinism to suggest that people were simply less intelligent or capable a few thousand years ago – it’s the same kind of thinking that makes people doubt that the Egyptians actually build the pyramids themselves and instead got some very clever aliens to do it for them. I can’t argue that Aristotle was running around with an electron microscope, but I also think there’s room for a more nuanced understanding of the kind of scientific understanding people had in the ancient world. Even if he couldn’t see or measure them, the Roman scholar Lucretius grasped the existence of atoms, and the Romans were incredible architects and engineers (see, y’know, the Colosseum and the aqueducts and their ballistic weapons and and and…).

Ancient people were curious and asked lots of questions about how the world worked. And, let’s not forget that nineteenth century science was not the pinnacle of accuracy and precision. Even now, there are gaps in our knowledge and abilities. We’re learning more everyday, but it’s foolish to think that we’re anywhere close to a complete and unified understanding of everything. I’m doubtful that we ever will, and it actually doesn’t bother me at all. I like knowing that there will always be new questions and mysteries.