- This topic has 11 voices and 37 replies.
-
Posts
-
I was watching a program on the history international channel about the dark ages. The general consensus was that the dark ages were dark because of the church and religion in general. What are your thoughts?
I was watching a program on the history international channel about the dark ages. The general consensus was that the dark ages were dark because of the church and religion in general. What are your thoughts?
That they're wrong. I mean, when you think of it, there's the Glory of Rome at one end of the timeline and the growth of cities and nations in the Middle Ages. The Dark Ages were the formative years. The ideals of Rome had to have passed somehow, and it is my understanding that it was the Church and religion that actually maintained a number of Roman ideals which brought structure to the rest of Western Civilization later on.
I agree with Phid and I'll take it one step further….there was no Dark Ages. Technology continued to advance, albeit in different ways. Architecture continued to progress, market economies developed, localized statutory laws came into being, agriculture actually improved (but climate change in Europe retarded productivity). Rome was a violent culture compared to the early and middle Medieval period. The notion that things just came to a screeching halt when Rome fell in 476 A.D. is a misnomer especially since the Eastern half of the empire was still going strong in Constantinople. The Byzantines carried the torch of Rome on for about another six hundred years until the coming of the Golden Age of Islam. I get frustrated when people talk about the Dark Ages since it is quite obvious from the historical record that Rome's breakup didn't set Europe back as much as they think.
Then what is the myth of the dark ages?
I suppose the myth is that Europe was totally thrown into darkness and civilization just came to a halt. The fact is, our records during that time are scant so the temptation is to say nothing notable was occuring, but none of my college professors agreed with that theory. They are quick to point out where our records pick up again, technology had noticeably improved by then so something had to be going on. 😀
To add to this we have another thread where we discussed some of this at . It was humanists from Italy who coined the temr “Dark Ages” and nowadays there's a recognition that this term, even though it remains, is not really a good one.
That older thread says there was a lack of literature. How true is this?
That and the loss of "culture"... (non-church) art etc. after the fall of Rome. Much was achieved but it was the church focus on the here-after and little else that turned most folks to mere survival.
So really our lack of knowledge as to how things progreesed during that time is why it came to be called the dark ages?
So really our lack of knowledge as to how things progreesed during that time is why it came to be called the dark ages?
Seems likely to me at least.Wally
That older thread says there was a lack of literature. How true is this?
It may be somewhat true. Beowulf was written around 1000 A.D. and based on oral tradition, and according to the article monks were primarily the only ones who could read/write at the time. We also have St. Augustine's Confessions and City of God during the Dark Ages. I don't know if these latter two would be considered classical literature, though. I can't think of much in terms of writing from the Dark Ages. During the Middle Ages we begin to see seminal works such as The Canterbury Tales and The Divine Comedy.
It may be somewhat true. Beowulf .... I can't think of much in terms of writing from the Dark Ages. During the Middle Ages we begin to see seminal works such as The Canterbury Tales and The Divine Comedy.
The key here is that the knowledge and lit. were aropund but not readily available to the masses; not having a wide audience was the kiss of death, this all cleared up when the Ren/Ref dawned and people began to read and expand their horizons. I agree there was much going on but only a few knew anything about it... them calling this era the Dark Ages was like calling Africa the Dark Continent... ignorant but understandable.When we judge history by today's standards history will always come out on the low end of things.Cheers,Wally
I do think that advances in knowledge were made during the Dark Ages and I listed some great thinkers in another thread on the matter, “Welcome to the Dark Ages board”. When we think about it, there had to have been progress made in sciences/arts, or else we would have had a vacuum between the fall of Rome and the Early Middle Ages, which we do not have. The thing is that knowledge was likely transmitted orally to the masses during this period. It is my understanding, though, that books were kept intact by being transcribed by monks. It's not that no progress was made, but rather that great works of literature seem to be absent.What I meant by the lack of literature from the period is that we don't really have significant works from the Dark Ages like we do in other eras. The Greeks produced works such as the Iliad and the Odyssey, Rome produced the Aeneid, and then we skip a thousand years or so before we get to Beowulf and other works. The Middle Ages then produced some great works like Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, the Divine Comedy, etc.According to the earlier thread I mentioned above, the "Dark" adjective for the post-Roman age in Europe was made by humanists as a jab at the time period. Although we now know it wasn't so "dark" after all, the term remains.
I do think that advances in knowledge were made during the Dark Ages and... not that no progress was made, but rather that great works of literature seem to be absent.What I meant by the lack of literature from the period is that we don't really have significant works from the Dark Ages ... Middle Ages then produced some great works like Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, the Divine Comedy, etc.According to the earlier thread I mentioned above, the "Dark" adjective for the post-Roman age in Europe was made by humanists as a jab at the time period. Although we now know it wasn't so "dark" after all, the term remains.
Works for me... too bad some of my students will always fall for the idea that the sun didn't come up for several hundred years....Wally
