3 ms·
That non-historians often misunderstand the shape and scope of the Dark Ages doesn't seem like a problem of definition, but of widespread ignorance. People who
by pwinnski 9y ago
That non-historians often misunderstand the shape and scope of the Dark Ages doesn't seem like a problem of definition, but of widespread ignorance. People who elevate the discovery of America, the renaissance, or the scientific revolution to the degree you describe are not going to be dissuaded by any sort of renaming, because those views aren't factually based in the first place.
- boomboomsubban 9y agoI started this off by saying it was one piece of a much wider problem. Calling it the Dark Ages can make your ignorance seem correct in a way that other names don't. Calling them the Early Middle Ages gets rid of the false narrative of later events ending the Dark Ages, and it doesn't accidentally imply nothing happened anywhere. It's not going to end ignorance, just remove confusion. What reason is there to keep calling it the Dark Ages? As for the isolated demand for rigor, I would not expect most people to know anything about the examples given. If I were talking about them, I would immediately add a qualifier explaining what they are. The Dark Ages are a more common term, being widely used outside of history.