^^^^^^
Exactly. For whatever reason, the "Dark Ages" (Christ, I hate that term) and the medieval period seem to be identified in peoples' minds as one static period of riding around on horseback with swords, with an occasional road trip into the Holy Land to lop off the odd Muslim's head. Said era abruptly ending when Columbus sets foot in America in 1492.
I mean, if we're counting from the date of the fall of Rome (476 AD) through to Columbus, that is over one thousand years. By way of comparison, try and imagine someone saying that there basically weren't any societal changes from, say, the year 1800 to the year 2000. The time period is compressed -- 200 years -- but the advancement of technology and civilisation is, to my mind, roughly equivalent as between 400-1492.
Another point about the "Dark Ages" is that they weren't dark. Western Europe from 500-1500 was a slowly but constantly developing civilisation; I like Joseph and Frances Gies' "Cathedral, Forge, and Waterwheel" a short but illuminating text on this subject.
This characterisation of the Dark Age/medieval period as backward partially comes from bad press during the Enlightenment, I've come to understand. Scholars of that period thought of their own time as (surprise surprise) enlightened because they had made reason their metaphorical God, and they looked down (somewhat prematurely, in my view) on the faith-centred medieval and Dark Age periods as eras of ignorance. As a result, their beliefs coloured their writing, and until recently at least our ideas about medieval civilisation were coloured by theirs.
Added to that is I think a certain overawe for Roman achievements. We have to bear in mind that the Roman Empire was not an Atlantean supercivilisation. As with all civilisations, it had its technological and philosophical blind spots. The Romans were masters of civil engineering, but they were seriously backward on chemistry and the more theoretical branches of knowledge because their psychology was focused on the practical and the pragmatic. Before them, Greek civilisation had its own blind spots. I cannot recall exactly where the quote comes from, but one mathematician provided a salient argument that because of a particular line of thought the Greeks took in reference to mathematics and science, it set back the "progress" of science for literally hundreds of years. The same person speculated that had the Greeks taken one course rather than the one they did, we might already be in starships with Greek lettering along the side.
Every civilisation made its mistakes: ours will, too.
Exactly. For whatever reason, the "Dark Ages" (Christ, I hate that term) and the medieval period seem to be identified in peoples' minds as one static period of riding around on horseback with swords, with an occasional road trip into the Holy Land to lop off the odd Muslim's head. Said era abruptly ending when Columbus sets foot in America in 1492.
I mean, if we're counting from the date of the fall of Rome (476 AD) through to Columbus, that is over one thousand years. By way of comparison, try and imagine someone saying that there basically weren't any societal changes from, say, the year 1800 to the year 2000. The time period is compressed -- 200 years -- but the advancement of technology and civilisation is, to my mind, roughly equivalent as between 400-1492.
Another point about the "Dark Ages" is that they weren't dark. Western Europe from 500-1500 was a slowly but constantly developing civilisation; I like Joseph and Frances Gies' "Cathedral, Forge, and Waterwheel" a short but illuminating text on this subject.
This characterisation of the Dark Age/medieval period as backward partially comes from bad press during the Enlightenment, I've come to understand. Scholars of that period thought of their own time as (surprise surprise) enlightened because they had made reason their metaphorical God, and they looked down (somewhat prematurely, in my view) on the faith-centred medieval and Dark Age periods as eras of ignorance. As a result, their beliefs coloured their writing, and until recently at least our ideas about medieval civilisation were coloured by theirs.
Added to that is I think a certain overawe for Roman achievements. We have to bear in mind that the Roman Empire was not an Atlantean supercivilisation. As with all civilisations, it had its technological and philosophical blind spots. The Romans were masters of civil engineering, but they were seriously backward on chemistry and the more theoretical branches of knowledge because their psychology was focused on the practical and the pragmatic. Before them, Greek civilisation had its own blind spots. I cannot recall exactly where the quote comes from, but one mathematician provided a salient argument that because of a particular line of thought the Greeks took in reference to mathematics and science, it set back the "progress" of science for literally hundreds of years. The same person speculated that had the Greeks taken one course rather than the one they did, we might already be in starships with Greek lettering along the side.
Every civilisation made its mistakes: ours will, too.
Remissas, discite, vivet.
God save us from people who mean well. -storm