|
Mantis42 posted:maybe he was just reading modern historians who see all the mass death and economic collapse and write things like "actually the dark ages didn't exist, the roman empire didn't collapse, it was just a period of institutional transformation and new cultural development" Yeah that’s not what modern historiographical consensus claims. The point of pushing back on the dark ages label is that the dark ages narrative suggests that basically no progress or innovations of consequence happened during the early or middle medieval era and that’s simply not true.
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2023 07:35
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 02:52 |
|
|
Jon posted:Yeah, this seemed like a very conspicuous omission given how obvious of an implication it is It is another part of the push back on the Dark Ages label, yes. It is implicitly suggesting that nothing of consequence can happen without a giant imperial state conquering everything (badly, and then imploding). The facts just don't support it. Life went on after the Roman state collapsed, albeit with significant de-urbanization because it was no long practical.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2023 23:08
|
|