3 ms·

I'm also interested in this. Apparently recently there's an aversion to using terms like "dark ages", because they imply the period between antiquity and the r

by bedobi 6y ago

I'm also interested in this. Apparently recently there's an aversion to using terms like "dark ages", because they imply the period between antiquity and the renaissance was poorly recorded or objectively worse, and historians shouldn't make value judgements, they should just accurately account for what happened in any given period. I do get that, and I'm no expert, but... It sure seems to me like things were a whole lot objectively worse during the dark ages. Literacy, trade and all kinds of other objectively good things were replaced by more or less complete chaos, constant fighting between countless warlords, plagues... Like yes the large empires of antiquity did their own share of fighting and other bad things but regular people within any given empire seem to have had better lives than more or less anyone during the dark ages. Would love to be corrected because I love learning about history!

baud147258 6y ago
Though the period in question here is between 400 and 1100, so it ends before the renaissance. But I don't think that time was only constant fighting, especially when comparing to the renaissance.
- arethuza 6y ago
  700 years is rather a long time - but in some places like here in Britain there was a lot going on in those times: the arrival of the Saxons and then the Scots and the subsequent wars then the arrival of the Vikings which arguably led to the formation of the two main kingdoms on the island (not to mention battles between them such as Brunanburh) then the successful invasion of England by the Normans. We know a lot happened in those times but very little detail - e.g. the location of Brunanburh
maurys 6y ago
Another reason why it's less fashionable to call it the Dark Ages is that that's a more Western centric look at that time. It was actually an interesting time to be in Asia around then. John Green does an excellent "Crash Course History" video on the topic if you're interested.
- TheCoelacanth 6y ago
  Couldn't the same be said of any era name? You wouldn't rename the "Warring States Period" because Europe was actually fairly peaceful at that time.
  - maurys 6y ago
    I hadn't heard of the Warring States Period before but after a quick search I see your point. I guess "The Dark Ages" evoked a more universal idea that there was no progress anywhere while the "Warring States" period is understood to be more local. But personally, I was bringing to light arguments I've heard against calling it the Dark Ages. Don't have a personal axe to grind either way.

by bedobi 6y ago

baud147258 6y ago

Though the period in question here is between 400 and 1100, so it ends before the renaissance. But I don't think that time was only constant fighting, especially when comparing to the renaissance.

arethuza 6y ago
700 years is rather a long time - but in some places like here in Britain there was a lot going on in those times: the arrival of the Saxons and then the Scots and the subsequent wars then the arrival of the Vikings which arguably led to the formation of the two main kingdoms on the island (not to mention battles between them such as Brunanburh) then the successful invasion of England by the Normans. We know a lot happened in those times but very little detail - e.g. the location of Brunanburh

maurys 6y ago

Another reason why it's less fashionable to call it the Dark Ages is that that's a more Western centric look at that time. It was actually an interesting time to be in Asia around then. John Green does an excellent "Crash Course History" video on the topic if you're interested.

TheCoelacanth 6y ago
Couldn't the same be said of any era name? You wouldn't rename the "Warring States Period" because Europe was actually fairly peaceful at that time.
- maurys 6y ago
  I hadn't heard of the Warring States Period before but after a quick search I see your point. I guess "The Dark Ages" evoked a more universal idea that there was no progress anywhere while the "Warring States" period is understood to be more local. But personally, I was bringing to light arguments I've heard against calling it the Dark Ages. Don't have a personal axe to grind either way.