It’s 1973. A small, bushy-browed man with a thick Polish-British accent stands in the mud at Auschwitz. He doesn’t offer a scripted monologue or a frantic plea for peace. Instead, Jacob Bronowski kneels, reaches into the silt where the ashes of four million people were flushed, and lets the wet earth run through his fingers. He tells the camera that this—this loss of humanity—happens when people crave the "certainty" of gods rather than the messy, beautiful "uncertainty" of science.
The Ascent of Man TV series wasn't just another BBC documentary. It was a massive, thirteen-part gamble that changed how we think about our own species.
You’ve probably seen the grainy clips on YouTube. Maybe you remember your parents hushed in front of a wood-paneled television set. Honestly, it’s wild how well it holds up. While modern science shows rely on CGI dragons and hyper-edited jump cuts, Bronowski just talked. He traveled to 27 countries. He stood in the shadows of the Great Mosque of Isfahan and the laboratories of Salk Institute. He made us feel like the history of science was actually the history of us.
The Man Behind the Masterpiece: Who Was Jacob Bronowski?
Bronowski wasn't some random presenter hired for his looks. He was a polymath. A mathematician. A poet. A guy who worked on secret military research during World War II but spent his later years trying to reconcile the cold logic of physics with the warmth of the human spirit.
He wrote the scripts himself. Every single word.
Most people don't realize that The Ascent of Man was actually a response to Kenneth Clark’s Civilisation. Clark’s show was all about art and high culture—basically, the stuff rich people look at in museums. Bronowski thought that was only half the story. He argued that the invention of the plow or the discovery of the structure of DNA was just as "cultural" as a Michelangelo statue. To him, science was an act of imagination. It was a human birthright.
He was dying while filming it. Not many people knew that at the time. You can see his physical decline as the episodes progress, but his intellectual intensity only gets sharper. He passed away just a year after the series premiered in the United States. It feels like he poured every last drop of his life force into those thirteen hours of film.
✨ Don't miss: Cuba Gooding Jr OJ: Why the Performance Everyone Hated Was Actually Genius
Why the "Ascent" Title Matters
The name is a cheeky riff on Charles Darwin’s The Descent of Man. Bronowski wasn't interested in the biological "descent" or the mere mechanics of evolution. He wanted to track the "ascent"—the way humans used their minds to transcend their biological limits.
We’re weak. We don’t have claws. We don’t have thick fur. Basically, we’re vulnerable naked apes. But we have the thumb and the forebrain.
The series kicks off with Lower than the Angels, an episode that looks at our physical evolution. But it quickly pivots to the "cultural evolution" that moved faster than our genes ever could. From the nomadic Bakhtiari tribes of Iran to the starry-eyed astronomers of the Renaissance, the show argues that every breakthrough was a step away from the beast and toward something more... well, human.
The Famous "Knowledge or Certainty" Moment
If you only watch one scene from the 1970s, make it the end of episode eleven.
Bronowski is at Auschwitz-Birkenau. It’s gray. It’s quiet. He talks about the "Arrogance of Dogma." He argues that when we think we have the absolute truth—whether it's political, religious, or even scientific—we stop being human. We start treating people like objects.
"We have to touch people," he says. It’s a gut punch. It’s also the most powerful defense of scientific humility ever recorded. Science isn't about being "right." It's about being "less wrong" over time. It’s about the constant realization that our knowledge is imperfect.
🔗 Read more: Greatest Rock and Roll Singers of All Time: Why the Legends Still Own the Mic
The Production Was a Total Nightmare (In a Good Way)
The BBC and Time-Life spent a fortune on this. This was the era of 16mm film, not digital cards. They lugged heavy cameras to the top of the Andes. They dealt with sandstorms and bureaucratic red tape in the middle of the Cold War.
Adrian Malone, the director, had a specific vision. He wanted the show to look cinematic. He used long takes. He let the silence sit. You don't see that much anymore. Nowadays, producers are terrified that if there isn't a loud noise every six seconds, you'll check your phone. Bronowski trusted your attention span.
- The Music: The score used everything from Pink Floyd-esque synthesizers to classical pieces. It felt futuristic and ancient at the same time.
- The Locations: They didn't use green screens. If Bronowski was talking about the Alhambra, he was at the Alhambra.
- The Editing: It’s slower than modern TV, sure. But it’s deliberate. It gives you room to breathe and think.
What Most People Get Wrong About the Series
A lot of critics today look back and call it "Eurocentric." And yeah, to a degree, it is. It focuses heavily on the Western scientific tradition. But if you actually watch the whole thing, Bronowski goes out of his way to highlight the Islamic Golden Age and the contributions of Eastern mathematics. He wasn't trying to say Europe was better; he was tracing the specific thread of the "Scientific Revolution" that happened to ignite in Europe but belonged to the world.
Another misconception? That it’s "pro-nuclear" or "pro-technology" in a blind way. It's actually the opposite. Having seen the ruins of Nagasaki firsthand as a researcher, Bronowski was terrified of what happens when science is divorced from ethics. The whole series is a plea for us to grow up and handle the power we’ve discovered.
Why You Should Care in 2026
We live in an era of deepfakes and algorithmic echo chambers. The message of The Ascent of Man is more relevant now than it was in 1973.
We’re currently obsessed with AI and the "next step" in our evolution. Bronowski’s work reminds us that the tool isn't the point—the intent behind the tool is. Whether it’s a flint hand-ax or a large language model, the "ascent" is about our ability to visualize a future that doesn't exist yet.
💡 You might also like: Ted Nugent State of Shock: Why This 1979 Album Divides Fans Today
The show is a reminder that science is a deeply personal, almost spiritual endeavor. It’s not just a bunch of guys in white coats looking at test tubes. It’s a collective human masterpiece, like a cathedral built over a thousand years.
How to Experience The Ascent of Man Today
You can find most of the episodes on various streaming platforms or even physical DVD sets if you're old-school. Honestly, the book version is also incredible. It reads like a long, poetic essay.
Don't binge it. It’s too dense for that. Watch one episode. Let it rattle around in your brain for a few days.
If you want to understand why we are the way we are—why we build, why we destroy, and why we keep asking "why"—this is the definitive text. It’s a love letter to the human race, written by a man who saw the worst of what we could do and still chose to believe in our potential.
Practical Steps to Revisit the Series:
- Start with Episode 11 ("Knowledge or Certainty"): If you’re skeptical, start here. It’s the emotional core of the series and will give you the context for why the rest matters.
- Get the Book: The prose is actually different from the spoken script in subtle ways. It’s one of the few "TV tie-in" books that stands alone as a literary work.
- Check Out "Civilisation" for Comparison: Watch an episode of Kenneth Clark’s show right after an episode of Bronowski’s. The contrast between "History as Art" and "History as Discovery" is fascinating.
- Look for the Restored Versions: There have been several digital clean-ups of the footage. The colors in the "Majestic Clockwork" episode (about Newton and Einstein) are stunning when they aren't buried under 1970s film grain.
The Ascent of Man TV series isn't just a history lesson. It’s a mirror. And even fifty years later, the reflection it shows us is surprisingly clear, a bit messy, and undeniably hopeful. It’s about the fact that we are a work in progress. We’re still ascending. Or at least, we’re trying to.