skipped an archetype like time before last?

[Marypoza]

(04-20-2019, 05:17 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(04-20-2019, 03:47 PM)TheNomad Wrote:

(04-19-2019, 09:09 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: We are 1850s redux. The authors thought that was a 3T too and gave the 4T only 5 years. But it was the 4T, and so it today. That explains everything and no revision is needed.

Sorry to ask this but can you explain that?  I've not been able to grasp how archetype was "skipped".  I do the numbers in my head and seems strange.  Because if G.I. generation were Heroes, and they were born at turn of that century, CW was only about 20 years prior.  What was skipped, when, and exactly?

The Civil War was 35-40 years before the birth of the first GI Generation member, according to Strauss and Howe. What they did was a bit strange. They called it the Civil War anomaly. They and some of their readers say it was because the Civil War Crisis came too suddenly and was over quickly, so there was no time for a Hero Generation, and so the civil war soldiers were not "heroes" and the civic archetype was "skipped" in that saeculum. I guess they felt that the civil war happened because the civic viewpoint was missing.

But actually, what they did was extend the preceding prophet generation to 30 years. That is longer for a generation than in any saeculum, including the longer ones from before modern times. The Transcendental Generation was supposed to be from 1792 to 1822. They made it that long, it appears, so they could brand Abraham Lincoln as a "prophet" instead of a "nomad."

I think there was something strange about that saeculum, but I don't think it's as anomalous as they say. Various posters here over the years have proposed alternate dates that smooth out the generations and the turnings. The common element in these is usually to either include the 1850s in the civil war 4T (which I favor) or include the Reconstruction Era in it (which shortens the following saeculum instead of shortening the civil war saeculum as S&H did).

The 1850s was a decade of attempted compromise, and putting off the inevitable conflict. It was a time of poor presidential leadership, especially by Democrats who enabled Dixie's oppression. Polarization was complete, and increased throughout the decade, and actions were muddled and confused. It followed an unnecessary war of conquest in 1846-48, which brought new states into the Union and exploded the debate over which states were to be free and which slave. Also overseas there was a famine in 1846 and a chain of revolutions in 1848 that increased immigration into the USA and consequent fears of foreigners. The Know-Nothing Party (also known as the American Party) ran Fillmore for president on an anti-immigrant platform. I don't know if they passed out red hats. But according to wikipedia, "Know Nothing candy, Know Nothing tea, and Know Nothing toothpicks appeared." The industrial revolution was revving up in America, which was altering the economy and its technology and increasing insecurity among people accustomed to the old ways. This followed a severe depression abroad in 1846-48 which affected the USA as well. You can see some resemblance to the 2010s here. And people are not sure that we are even in a 4T today, which parallels Strauss and Howe's decision to label the 1850s as 3T when it was actually the early 4T.

Such anomaly as occurred I explain by the inherent division of the country between Yankee and Dixie, in which the former was modern industrial and the latter medieval agricultural. Something of that split continues today between blue and red, much as that of 1860 was between blue and gray. But the fact that half the country then was a medieval agricultural aristocracy was slowing down the saeculum, even though the modern democratic and industrial half wanted to surge forward. Modern progress was just getting going in the world, and democracy was just getting established and was facing stern resistance since the Revolution (French/American/Industrial/Romantic). 

It took some time for the Revolution to win, and in fact it's still going on here and around the world. But the transition which the anomaly represented and the Civil War decided was that between a modern saeculum of 80-84 years for the USA and a medieval one of about 100 years. The turnings and generations cycles had to be speeded up as progress speeded up. The modern saeculum involves all the people, with longer life-spans, whereas the medieval/ancient type only involved 2 living generations and only the upper class. Most people in the ancient and medieval saecula did not participate in historic events and did not change their lifestyle or location or experience generation gaps. The Civil War was the moment when the modern faster saeculum took hold for the entire country after it consolidated with and defeated the medieval, aristocratic half. Of course the residue from that division remains, and right now the residual medieval half of our country has ruled it for some 40 years now. Thus we stand at the edge of another decision of whether to go forward or be held back.

I look upon the civil war generations as hybrids, and sub-generations, myself, and retain the basic S&H dates for them, and redate the turnings to smooth those out and include the 1850s as part of the 4T.

-- your description of the CW saeculum split btween medieval ancient types & modern industrial types reminds me of a post David made about this current saeculum being split btween the wingnutz being stuck in the 3T while the rest of us are moving on into the 4T

Btw, l don't think S&H drew out the Transcendentals 30 yrs 2 include  Abraham Lincoln, who was born in 1809. S&H could of ended the Transcendentals in 1810 if that was the case