Maybe then a more interesting excercise would be to work out what periods and events actually did cause significant social, technological, and economic setbacks for post-classical Western Europe. Off the top of my head,the Black Death and the period of famine that came before it and the 30 Year's War would be strong candidates.
Where would we be today if not for the Dark Ages?
- Thread starter Armored Diplomacy
- Start date
Flocculencio
Donor
The black death actually laid the groundwork for the modern western world by shaking up the class system
The OP is rather eurocentric in any case. Even if the dark ages were as dark as most people mistakenly believe, its not as if the Middle East, Persia, India or China were affected.
BTW, how much science or technology was there to suppress?
Did Diocletian's Rome have much in the way of technology that, say, Julius Caesar's Rome didn't?
Did Diocletian's Rome have much in the way of technology that, say, Julius Caesar's Rome didn't?
I was not aware of the efforts of the church in Baghdad, Cairo, Cordoba and Isfahan, but I am certainly grateful.
I'd rather live in 2nd century Rome (the city) than 7th (because well, Italy got ravaged between those dates), or 13th century (High Middle Ages) France than 8th, but I don't think there's an appreciable difference for the worse (or better) between the 5th and 6th centuries.
Far less dark than the myth, but certainly not the best of times for the old lands of the WRE.
But the other half of this is, as stated, once things start improving, things get better than they were. A period of disarray being replaced by a period of improvement.
Dragos Cel Mare
Banned
He was a German Cardinal from the 1400s who postulated (long before Copernicus and Gallileo) that the Earth revolved around the Sun. He also thought that the Stars in the sky were Suns and that they had inhabited planets as well (making him one of the first people to propose the existence of extraterrestrials).
That's pretty damn cool.
Why do churchmen like this never get mentioned? At least we hear of Mendel with genetics.
Dragos Cel Mare
Banned
More about him here. He also wrote Da Pace Fide, which despite being Pro-Christian, gave respect to other religions.
Peaceful, quietly intellectual guys are boring. Most of traditional historioography is effectively geared towards the male 12-18 demographic. Quick, name a German 20th-century leader! Stresemann? Adenauer? Brandt? Ulbricht? No? I thought so. Hitler gets all the press. The phenomenon is the same with churchmen - you can make the history books by being Innocent III, St Boniface or Cyril of Alexandria.
Yeah, but we at least hear of St. Francis of Assisi, in a token gesture towards the fact that they existed.
In Quebec, we had a famous monk who worked in botanics... André-Marie Victorin, if I remember well.
Originally Posted by CandyDragon
those Greek and Roman texts preserved by the Church were generally preserved simply so they could learn the Classical languages and thus be able to read the Bible. At the same time, countless works were done away with because the Catholic dogmatists saw no use for them..
.
Not "done away with", just not recopied. Naturally the monks only recopied what was of interest to them, and no one else bothered to recopy anything at all.
That is the point. The Churchmen may not have preserved as much as we would have liked, but without them even less would have been preserved, not more.
I think technology today without the Dark Ages wouldn't be much different than it is in OTL, for many of the reasons already mentioned.
But to modify the OP's question, what would we be politically today if not for the Dark Ages? Or ethnically?
Avoiding a "Dark Age" scenario implies that western Rome never fell, or at least survived a few hundred more years. How would this affect the migrations of peoples and the formations of new states if western Rome collapses at a later date?
Or is this question just way too momentous to adequately answer?
But to modify the OP's question, what would we be politically today if not for the Dark Ages? Or ethnically?
Avoiding a "Dark Age" scenario implies that western Rome never fell, or at least survived a few hundred more years. How would this affect the migrations of peoples and the formations of new states if western Rome collapses at a later date?
Or is this question just way too momentous to adequately answer?
I was talking about the West. Islam did considerably more, and arguably saved a number of more valuable texts, as well as expanded and enhanced them with their own experimentation, but those would filter in later.
I definitely appreciate my words being altered to suit sentiments that I find rather offensive. The church is not some evil entity, out to destroy all secular knowledge.
Last edited:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie-Victorin
It is REALLY later than Middle age, but even in the Grande Noirceur, great minds could arise - in the clergy as well as outside.
A few of the thinkers and actors of the Quiet Revolution also came from the *clergy*, so Maponus's implications are incorrect.
You can be of the 'vows', and be a free mind.
Well, how else will you interest schoolboys in history?
That said this thread makes me miss IBC and his complicated history thing...