It has been a pleasant diversion to think back over the years and give brief accounts of outstanding people whose paths in life I have crossed, if only peripherally. Of course it has led to many a comment on how to measure genius, greatness or historical importance and many a question asked regarding who were the real shapers of events or the most influential in their fields.
Arguing over who should be on this or that list of the great and influential gives much harmless enjoyment to mankind. Futile though such arguments are, they generate lovely interludes of animated conversational cut and thrust. Some of our pleasantest, most carefree hours are spent in this sport.
And, by the way, I am in a position to name here and now the West Indies Eleven for the next Test match we play, whenever that happens to be. Ignoring the infantile goings-on currently bedevilling the great game in the region, our best team is as follows: Gayle, Kirk Edwards, Samuels, Darren Bravo, Chanderpaul, Pollard, Baugh, Russell, Rampaul, Fidel Edwards and Bishoo. I regret that very likeable, hard-working, fit, sensible, supremely loyal journeyman Darren Sammy cannot find a place, so the captain will simply have to be either Gayle or Chanderpaul.
I don’t expect anyone will disagree with this selection but you never know – in such discussions I always find there are some misguided people who for some peculiar reason don’t agree with me.
But what about the ultimate list? There is a book which is the last word in the making of lists. The book is The 100: Ranking the Most Influential People in History by Michael Hart. The article I read about the book does not give the full list of 100, but it provides some fascinating, contentious and eccentric examples. For instance, who on earth is Edward de Vere at number 31? Well, he turns out to be better known as William Shakespeare, a name which Michael Hart thinks is a pseudonym for the real man.
To my disgust, literary people hardly figure at all in the list. There are only Edward de Vere and Homer who squeezes in at 98 after Charlemagne at 97. This is disgraceful. I would have filled the list with poets since they are the best guardians of language, and language is the greatest creation of mankind. But then, not only are there just two poets, there are absolutely no artists or composers. The only slight consolation is that Edward de Vere does figure above Hitler (39) and Stalin (66).
Women may feel aggrieved since the list is almost exclusively male – Isabella of Spain is highest ranked among the few women at 65. But then I suppose women can easily shrug this off: “wait until you see the score after the next few hundred years!”
The top ten are marvellously arguable. Let me give the count-down to the topmost. At number 10 is Albert Einstein – I would have thought he would have been nearer the lead – and at number 9 is Columbus; views will differ, to say the least, whether his influence was for good or evil. Then at numbers 8 and 7 are Johann Gutenberg and T’Sai Lun. Who was T’Sai Lun? He was the man who, in the second century, invented paper. He boiled bamboo and rolled the pulp into thin sheets. I certainly agree with his high placement. He takes precedence over Gutenberg, inventor of movable print, on the grounds that print would not have been worth inventing without paper.
T’Sai Lun, inventor of paper – I have learned about a previously unknown hero. It is interesting to note that the paper monopoly bequeathed by T’Sai Lun enabled China to achieve the highest level of civilisation in the world for many centuries. Europe’s belated manufacture of paper (replacing very expensive vellum and parchment), coupled with Gutenberg’s invention, accelerated Western literacy whereupon China, stuck with block printing, fell behind. Which all goes to show what and who are really important in history.
The leading six in the list are, except for one, the greatest teachers the world has ever known. The exception is probably history’s supreme genius though he believed in alchemy and seems to have lived much of his life on the edge of madness. So here are the six top men. Number 6 is Saint Paul, number 5 is Confucius, number 4 is Buddha, number 3 is Jesus Christ, number 2 is Isaac Newton. And number 1 in the list, most influential of all it is strongly argued, is… the prophet Muhammad.
At the end of all this Montaigne’s famous aphorism should be recalled: “We are more solicitous that men speak of us at all than of how they speak.” Some of the people in this top 100 are unspeakably evil though undoubtedly influential. But an encouraging number honour Rabindranauth Tagore’s beatitude: “Blessed is he whose fame does not outshine his truth.” Mostly, in this list anyway, those who have influenced history are people whose truths have outshone even their fame. But whether that is overall a correct assessment of history is, of course, a question quite sufficient to start another of those marathon discussions. Break out another bottle or two of 5-year old and prepare the pot of curried chicken.
