| The Dark Ages....
Posted: 1/9/2006 7:33:12 AM | The reason the dark ages were called the dark ages is because so little was known of them. There is vertualy nothing of the dark ages in writen record or archaeological record and so they were a dark spot on our understanding of the past. That is all.
**********************************************************************
Can you please clarify what a dark spot on our understanding might be. | |
|
| The Dark Ages....
Posted: 1/9/2006 4:45:22 PM | Okay so far it seems to be breaking this way with the people responding...
(a.) Dark ages because Christianity hadnt yet completely taken over as the dominant religion in Europe (I read that as ONLY religion)... and so ther was this large loss of "civilizing and educated" influence that the Church coulda and woulda evinced had the nasty Heathens allowed it to be so...I find this line of thinking simplistic and apologetic...
and...
(b.) ..That the Dark ages came about because the Roman Empire fell and took with them all the educated folks and record keepers and as a result there simply was no one to write down the history as it took place except the local Monastery Monke and they were busy doing other stuff, so sorry they simply were not available to document anything much Except church works and the occaisional local warlords demands to be sent to wherever... I am paraphrasing with this but it is the general drift... And I might add that this argument makes even less sense than the first one if you again are looking to answer the very straight forward question.."What caused the Dark Ages?"'
(c.) and sorry to the poster that put this forward, it does have signifigant "legs" but it doesnt answer the question either...that the Dark ages came about because in course of normal himan survival and daily life...people just didnt have time to write down what was taking place over long periods of time anyway... Well it actually does answer portions of the question especially if you are interested in the "how did it come to be allowed?" aspects...
So far I am not seeing anyone address that there was a single widespread , fairly organized group, that pretty much everyone feared, or at least healthily respected and it was they who had all the knowledge and ability to forestall and or / End any such thing as a dearth of human knowledge being shared widely and therefore start the Renaissance....and this is Exactly what the Church Did Not Do...
And So I am Asking Still What Caused the Dark Ages....????
Do any of you guys know of a Church doctrine that depended on keeping the masses of the population ignorant??? Can any of you folks explain what such a policy would have been expected to return by the church's actively practising it???
I am saying Why would the only source of education be actively engaged in keeping pretty much EVERYONE from getting educated??? To what ends???
So 'cmon...bring on the ideas and opinions but please no preaching...that is not what we are exploring here... | |
|
| The Dark Ages....
Posted: 1/10/2006 9:26:57 AM | sigh ... so what do you want? your hypothesis only? mad clerics in a conspiracy against the world?
Watched an interesting program on PBS the other day on York Minster Cathedral (12th century)?. A Mr. Brown was trying to figure out how the York was built as there were no written records. Perchance, a fanatic started the cathedral on fire and the aforementioned Mr. Brown found that the foundations of the existing cathedral was built upon a pre-existing, huge, "Norman" built church dating around 1000 (pre?) (so perhaps there were huge building projects going on in the Dark Ages)? Mr. Brown did eventually find written documentation (daily diary type) on the building of the cathedral ... found in the deep bowels of a church. So, rather than a conspiracy of mad clerics to keep the world ignorant, perhaps, the written documents of the Dark Ages were stored on sewn together parchments into scrolls of written info and they have simply disintegrated over the centuries. Actually, even more interesting than your "mad cleric" theory of the day is the geometric measurements used to build the "Norman" church that the York Minster Cathedral rests on today. | |
|
| The Dark Ages....
Posted: 1/10/2006 9:55:56 AM | "sigh ... so what do you want? your hypothesis only? mad clerics in a conspiracy against the world?
Whaaa???
River Loon... LEt me repeat my self... and maybe this time you wont find the need to sigh ...
" So 'cmon...bring on the ideas and opinions but please no preaching...that is not what we are exploring here..."
Thats what I want...kay? | |
|
nergal
|
Joined: 5/12/2005
Msg: 55 | |
| The Dark Ages....
Posted: 1/10/2006 10:04:15 AM | | I dont think it actually had anything to do with the Church. The Romans provided a positive and law enforcing goverment. When they left I dont think it was very long before things broke down to an extent. I can see tribes and other groups battling for power and land for centuries. Its very simialt to the Warring States period in Japan ... Its the era that spawned King Artyhur and other legends ... | |
|
| The Dark Ages....
Posted: 1/10/2006 10:18:55 AM | yeah ...I see what you are saying ... And isnt the Arthur legend at its core about the dialectic between the Old Way ie.,...Pantheistic, Many Gods, Roman Emperor as God ...ways,....as opposed to Christianity and the supposed inherent "morality" involved in being "Pure" and constant to that faith??
See, I recognize that it simply is a "Dark" period and that there is very little info...I understand that the Romans left and a huge power vacumn ensued...
I dont think there was a cabal of "Power Mad Monks"...rather there had to have been some kind of concerted effort made (by Whom??) to keep things "status quo",...and that this action was the primary cause of the "Dark"...
Why??? ,..Who was it?? As you say..the Romans were gone...so who was responsible??? | |
|
nergal
|
Joined: 5/12/2005
Msg: 57 | |
| The Dark Ages....
Posted: 1/10/2006 10:26:35 AM | | No the actual Arthur legend is simply about a guy who united the British people of the time. Possibly an descendant of Romans or Romanised Britons but generally a war leader who brought a lot of land under his sway and created some peace .. It was the writers of the 14th century that romantisized it and brought in the Grail and Chivalry and mixed in the Mabignion and the Tain too. The dark really does refer to the fact that there are a lot of Roman remains, ie roads and walls and other artifacts. Then later on there are Saxon artifacts and then Norman. In between those two points there is little found. More than likely the dark age settlements lie under Saxon ones, or were Roman houses which eventually fell into disrepair and ruin. I think its a fascinating era and made more mysterious by the lack of information we have but its not a conspiracy or anything other than a time in history when not much got written. | |
|
| The Dark Ages....
Posted: 1/10/2006 10:37:35 AM |
Can you please clarify what a dark spot on our understanding might be.
Sory, yeh, early moring post. What I mean is that there is just not a lot of information about the dark ages. We can tell you what certain Romans ate for breakest on any day of the week during the Romano Period, but we can't even tell you what people ate on any day during the Dark ages. There just is not enougth information, it is a void in our knowledge of history, sure we know a few important things, but only a very few and not in depth.
______________________________________________________________________________
Do any of you guys know of a Church doctrine that depended on keeping the masses of the population ignorant???
there was no docterine as such, but the church was invested in keeping information out of public hands. The Vatican banned the publishing of bibles unless they were in Latin for example. It was mot so much of a problem to be fair though, cause most people realy did not care. Do mechanics and doctors today care about quantum theory, I would say that mostly they do not.
People were far to busy trying to stay alive and to enjoy life, to care about something that most of them new nothing about anyway. They did not nead to write because they were taught trades by doing, they gained information about what was going on in the world from the church and the town crier (and from gosip). Any questions they had could be answered by people with more authority such as town wardens (local law offices) and church elders.
It was not so much that the people were being deprived of knowledge, just that it was not being recorded. The Roman had a system of education in place where anyone with a little bit of money could get a standard education and become litterate. this was an advantage as it ment they knew mathematics and could record stock and such likes.
The governments that took control after the Romans left, did not have this system of education in place. It was not deemed by the societies of the time to be important. No provision of eduction ment that it was harder to become litterat. Those wo were litterate were in high demand in official possitions and in church and as such much of thier writing was taken up with scribling down information for thier jobs.
Thats not to say that there were not people who did engage in "frivilous" writings, just that theywere rareer than during the Romano period.
People of the time also recycled more than they did at many other times in history. Wood would be carved for one job, then when it broke, recared fro another job and so on (the front door of my house ussed to be ships timbers in the Dark ages). Paper also was reused. It would be pulped, starched and redried many times because to the people of the time, it was simpler to do than to make new paper.
There is another factor to take into acount as well.
The technology of the time.
As an archaeologist, much of the information I obtain about past cultures comes from thier material culture, the things they left behind. Unfortunately there is very little material culture left from the Dark Ages.
There are several reasons for this. Firstly there was a subtle change to weter weather, this increased soil acidity and so cast off artifacts from the time have a lower likelyhood of surviving.
Secondly there was a change in technology from permanent ceramic wares, to light and disposable woodenwares. Wood rarely survives so again we have little evidence surviving. Stone and ceramics were such dificult and cumbersome materials to obtain and work and store and transport that it became much cheaper and easier to simply use disposable wood for most things, even houses were bulit on the premise that they would only last for 5 to 10 years and then be replaced.
This change in material culture reflects a change in societies atitudes and behaviour. wood had become a cheaper comodity and was easy to work and could be sourced localy (stone sometimes had to be sourced from hundreds of miles away.), so it provided more free time and resources when wood was ussed instead of stone. This had the effect of providing for larger families andmore lesure/recreation time for people.
What this ment though in terms of our understanding, is that people produced very little waste, what was produced was highly biodegradable and so dose not survive in the archaeological record. Combined with the inability of all but the most elite of society to read or write, means that there is very little information avaliable about that time period. And that is why it is called the Dark Ages. In all there was still widespread knowledge, people still asked questions and saught answers, people still recorded what went on around them, it just happens that there was less of it going on and that less of it survived. | |
|
| The Dark Ages....
Posted: 1/10/2006 10:53:18 AM |
Why??? ,..Who was it?? As you say..the Romans were gone...so who was responsible???
The exact same people who had been responsable during the Romano period, they just were no longer reciving supplies and aid form Rome anymore. When Rome invaded a country, it left the governments intact. They forced them to pay taxes and such like to Rome (in the case of Britain, it was food, gold, iron and bronze.) and in return they were able to trade with Rome. Scholars came acros from Rome and Greece to teach (a very well payed profsion of the time) and traders provided valuble comodities (belive it or not but salt was the most valued of these, being more expenxeve pound for pound than gold, hence "worth his salt".)
When the Romans left, trade was almost cut off. The Roads were no longer mantained and so trade routes became dangerous and arduos, comodities could no longer be transported across the entire contenant, scholars left to go where the luxurie items were most easily avaliable and very few people who knew how to teach wanted to remain in places so devoide of lifes little plesures.
On top of this, the governments that were in power, lost the protection and support of the Roman state, so war became a danger once more, they had to prepare themselves for many posobilities that they never had before because Rome had taken care of those things. Eductaion was way below defence of the realm on the governments agendas.
There was a concerted efort to keep things "status quo" but only the same one that has always existed. Governments wanted the best out of its subjects and so ensuring the status quo was as important then as it is today. But governments and churches alike did not activly try to blok atempts to become educated, they just tried to keep things running smothly to the best of thier abilities. | |
|
| The Dark Ages....
Posted: 1/11/2006 8:12:36 AM | Sooo Bright...you are talking , "in Loco Parentis" as the impetus for the people left in-situ post romanus?
The folks left behind and "in chareg" ,..(or at least able to convince others that they were) are in fact the reason behind the dearth of information ??? | |
|
nergal
|
Joined: 5/12/2005
Msg: 61 | |
| The Dark Ages....
Posted: 1/11/2006 8:45:34 AM | | No the dearth of information is simply due to the fact that nothing got done apart from power struggles ... There was little or no new construction .. no time for new writing | |
|
| The Dark Ages....
Posted: 1/12/2006 9:51:56 AM |
The folks left behind and "in chareg" ,..(or at least able to convince others that they were) are in fact the reason behind the dearth of information ???
No no, if you carefully read my post, you will see that it is the change of technology that is responasble for the Dearth of information. What was recorded and the material culture of the time, simply did not survive. It is not that things were not happening, just that there is very little information about what was happeing, because so little of it survives today. | |
|
| The Dark Ages....
Posted: 1/12/2006 10:18:02 AM | Yeah...Okay,...I agree with what you are saying (mostly) about the information not surviving...just not too sure the "how and why " part is all of the story...and I think it might not be easy from this point to find any other points of view...
Sooo,....anybody else??? Anybody care to toss a tidbit of hard won knowledge into the pot??? | |
|
| The Dark Ages....
Posted: 1/12/2006 11:56:22 AM | It is quite dificult to understand why the information would not survive, it depends on so many factors. Part of its chemistry, some of its phisics, bits of economics here and thier, as well as ergonomics and poltics and all other kinds of things.
Basicaly unlike the Romans, who used Clay for most things, Dark Age society used wood as thier main source of raw material. It was easy to work and so abundant that they did not even have to buy it, just walk out the house and look for a bit. They even made thier cutlery out of wood! (Just trying ussing a wooden spoon to eat your soup!!!)
Wood was so abundant because at the time the climate had become slighlty wetter, so tree growth was promoted over shrub groth as shrubery could not cope with the levels of rainfall. This made the soil slighly more acid as well.
Because the soil was more acid, and people were ussing wood for most things, most of thier material culture did not survive. This includes much of thier writen culture.
There was also a culture of recycling in operation at the time. Some resources such as paper, were dificult to make, so they would recycle them as it was easier than starting from scratch.
As you can see, the situation is to complex to explain in just a few words, my advice would be to read a few books, there are some intresting ones out thier such as "In Search of the Dark Ages" by Michael Wood.
This website should also help out a lot,
http://www.channel4.com/history/timeteam/darkages.html | |
|
| The Dark Ages....
Posted: 1/12/2006 12:03:26 PM | | Okay, I give...I suppose we can call this thread ..dead. | |
|
| The Dark Ages....
Posted: 1/12/2006 12:07:43 PM | | Sorry for the double post ...(accidental) I just wanted to say Thanks to all aho chipped in...and to rest of you pffft.(sticks out tongue and raises two fingers) heheh.. | |
|
| The Dark Ages....
Posted: 1/12/2006 4:46:54 PM | A couple of young ladies in their early twenties asked a shop keeper about what type of clothing was worn during a certain period of time and I helped answer the question. One, with her mouth open stared at me, then said, "What era are you from". I couldn't help it, my mouth said, "The Dark Ages"....
Thus my rendition of the Dark Ages is knowing something I shouldn't look old enough to know. | |
|
nergal
|
Joined: 5/12/2005
Msg: 68 | |
| The Dark Ages....
Posted: 1/12/2006 4:55:51 PM | | I live in Glastonbury .. its like the 60's more pvc | |
|
Home
login 
