>haha the dark ages didn't happen man
>everything was fine after the fall of Rome
>that's just a renaissance myth bro
When will this meme end?
>>929156
what was going on in Rome & The Vatican during the "Dark Ages" post Roman empire up to 1500s Reformation?
>>929156
Nobody is saying that Things were fine after the Fall of Rome
>>929156
No ones implying that.
Wow, your romatic era painting and buzzword just disproved the consensus
>>929200
>cringeworthy
>>>/reddit/
Oh really, a puppet emperor in Rome not being replaced caused a sudden catastrophe and the fall of civilization?
>>929156
>tries to claim the Dark Ages aren't a renaissance myth
>by posting a renaissance painting
Cool
>>929156
There wasn't a dark age anywhere in Europe aside from perhaps what is now modern-day England after the collapse of the Western Roman Empire. There was, however, a general decline in the state sophistication, in urban life, in long-distance trade and elaborate goods that lasted from 550 to the 12th century.
If anyone here is interested, Yale has a course online (on YT) that covers this very area. Which is not to say anyone should have faith in a Yale professor, bc obviously they have their own liberal agenda, esp. for a course they are allowing to be broadcast, but it makes some interesting points.
The Professor (forget who he is, but he's not a big name) also does not agree that "The Dark Ages" were some sort of completely stagnant time during which no progress was made.
Contrast this with a book such as "A Distant Mirror" (which is more pop history than true scholarly work, but impt bc the author was one of the first female authors in this arena to have any sort of respect/name).
Tuchman (who was elated to Morgenthau of the infamous "Morgenthau Plan," which is enough to make my skin crawl) argues that there "was no concept of time or progress" during period known as "The Dark ages."
Of course, it's become a very popular thing now, Whitey was so illiterate and backward until he was enlightened by the great wisdom of muslims from the East, the "golden age in spain," how "beautiful" the Alhambra is and how far superior it is to anything the white man could create, etc..., etc.. It's basically one big "NotAllMuslims" hashtag. The West has to downplay and even erase our own accomplishments to make the children of our "vibrant" new guests feel more welcome.
This is such a huge topic, but if you have time or interest, look up that Yale course on YT, as I found it at least bearable as far as UG history goes.
>>929262
>Whitey
Literally nobody Saw Middle Easterners and Europeans as Different In Appearance Untill the last two Centuries
>>929223
subtle bait
>Europe is the only place that exists in history
>>929156
>renaissance
>the dogmatic regurgitation of the antique classics was the best thing that ever happened to Western civilization
>>929185
For the first 50 years, Rome was occupied by the Ostrogothic Germans. Then the Eastern Romans came and took it back in 538. It stayed in Roman hands until 754, where it was handed to the Pope because the Byzantines could no longer spare the resources to defend it anymore.
The Pope accepted and founded the Papal States, and continued that way until Italian Unification some 1100 years later.
>>929156
>spend 1000 years discussing augustine, adding glosses to late 5th century allegories and writing scholia about the new testament, not washing a single time throughout this millenium
>not a 'dark age'
Just kek my shit up, alright?
>>929223
That's a 19th century Romanticist painting, can't you even recognize that?
>>929226
>There was a general decline in the state sophistication, in urban life, in long-distance trade and elaborate goods
>There wasn't a dark age anywhere
Sounds pretty dark m8, especially if you had the loss of all the classics and generally poorer literacy and education even among the upper classes.
Not soon enough.
Massive drop in literature both non-fiction and fiction. You can literally see art styles degrade in quality for nearly a thousand years.
>mere coincidence
>>929363
You don`t know very much about the period you are trying to comment on.
>>929381
>especially if you had the loss of all the classics
There was never a loss of the classics. Plus you had people like Gildas, Cassiodorus etc. who kept it all alive and added to it.
>generally poorer literacy and education even among the upper classes.
That shit was never high to begin with despite the memes. Most people in the Roman Empire were only functionally literate.
Education is probably correct though, since you couldn't as easily import a learned Greek slave from the far side of the world to teach your kid how to read and write.
The only genuine dark age was post-450 Britannia which was a true clusterfuck. Gaul, Italy and even Spain didn't get fucked that hard and settled relatively organised major post-Roman kingdoms. Roman Africa stayed prosperous up until the Arab invasion.
>>929388
Medieval art was pretty good in a few areas such as sculptures, diptychs, metalwork and ivory work. Barbarians also produced some masterpieces.
See:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Collections_of_Musée_national_du_Moyen_Âge
Yeah, most of them aren't as good as the best Roman works, but it's a rather unfair comparison given that Late Roman and provincial pieces were of lower quality as well.
>>929443
>There was never a loss of the classics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_work
>The term most commonly applies to works from the classical world
>>929518
Half of that shit was lost in antiquity itself since the entire point of certain works being classics is that they are considered the only things worth keeping. Late Roman nobles, virtually all of whom were Christian by the 5th century didn't bother to keep anything that didn't fit their new religion in some manner. It wasn't like there were thousands of libraries filled with works that suddenly vanished overnight. The ruling classes of the empire were nowhere near as keen to write as you might hope.
>>929533
Bullshit. Explain Menander. Explain why he is supposed to be a special case.
> It wasn't like there were thousands of libraries filled with works that suddenly vanished overnight.
Yet somehow any man of letter in Rome was familiar with these authors and could quote from them, while a particularly learned Medieval monk might have heard of his name.
>>929443
It took almost 1000 years for western Europe to reach the same level of organisation as the Pax Romana
>>929544
I would add that the fact that the Byzantines clearly add access to more classical works all throughout the Middle Ages (some of them didn't even survive to this day) also supports the claim that many classics disappeared in Medieval Europe.
>>929262
>Which is not to say anyone should have faith in a Yale professor, bc obviously they have their own liberal agenda
>le academics are all marxists trying to brainwash you don't trust academia!!!!
fuck off /pol/
>>929238
No, almost all "the dark ages aren't real" arguments are just "it wasn't this precipitous drop everyone pretends it is and scientific advancement continued."
The Roman empire had been stagnating for many years before its collapse anyway.
>>929560
This is what gets mean with the people who insist that there was nothing like the dark ages. What do they think sparked the renaissance in Italy? Or even Charlemagne's pseudo-renaissance?
>>929570
I'm not disputing that many vanished, but I dislike the suggestion that it happened in a brief period and didn't take like a millenia to occur. If there was loss it was most likely as a result of the decline of the Byzantine Empire itself in the Late Middle Ages.
>>929544
Do you think nobles in the late Roman west still bothered with Greek plays? More base stuff like Querolus was all that still survived in that period.
>>929591
>If there was loss it was most likely as a result of the decline of the Byzantine Empire itself in the Late Middle Ages.
If the decline of the Byzantine Empire led to the loss of classical works this means they had already disappeared from Western Europe.
>I dislike the suggestion that it happened in a brief period and didn't take like a millenia to occur.
It didn't take a millennia but a few centuries at most.
Take someone like Gregory of Tours, who got nothing but scorn and ridicule from 19th century scholars who all had a better grasp on Latin and the Classics than he did. And he was a Gallo-Roman historian and bishop, not some Frankish chieftain. As one translator put it, the fact that they couldn't find someone better to write the history of the Frankish kings perfectly illustrates the decline of Western civilization in that period.
>>929642
>illustrates the decline of Western civilization in that period.
You seem to be under the impression that there was ever a real cultural flourishing in the west under the Empire. When Greeks like Ammianus Marcellinus came to the west they filled a depressingly large niche. There were few cities in the west compared to the east and as a result fewer elite figures who would have their own libraries and love of learning. Figures like Isidore were the exception. It had all gone to put long before the so-called dark ages began in the west. There's a reason many historians of the middle ages start it in the year 284 with the rise of the dominate.
For us, with our privileged place in history, we can tell with certainty that after the fall of the Roman Empire, there were no Dark Ages. Literary and artist output was shifted to the monasteries and the courts of various kings who appeared.
For those living in the Renaissance, however, things were different. They had a clear focus Rome and tended to ignore Medieval sources deeming them not "great" enough.
Now we know that many of the documents that the Renaissance were in love with, however, were actually German reprints, indicating that the Dark Age monks were in some way involved with the reproduction of Roman texts.
>>929156
The problem isn't positing that there was a dark age. the problem is not realizing that it ended by 800, rather than 1500. The high middles ages was a very vital time for the west, with lots of intellectual, political, and artistic innovations.
>he sincerely believes the dark ages were an actual thing
>>930069
>exploring the galaxy
>islam and/or judaism still exist
nope
>>930082
>islam and/or judaism still exist
>religion in general still exist
>>929560
Yeah, Western Europe became a war like economic and cultural backwater.
But guess what, it led to rapid developments in military technology and a society of warriors. Hence the Franks pwning stupid Turks and taking Antioch and Jerusalem for a century.
How did all their wealth and knowledge save the Greeks when the Franks and Muslims came calling?
>>929381
It's called the dark ages because of lack of knowledge about it, and because Renaissance writers were faggots
>>930128
>Hence the Franks pwning stupid Turks and taking Antioch and Jerusalem for a century.
>Turks
U wot m8?
>>930216
He's just a /pol/tard with a lacking grasp of actual crusade history. Ignore him.
>>929226
>there wasn't a dark age
>except all this stuff that indicates a dark age, ignore that
>>929313
where does he claim this
>>929293
Why is that? That's quite strange, isn't it?
Then you have all these modern white folk claiming Asians as "honorary whites" and pretending Arabs are from a far different race than them.
But vast parts of the empire continued to stay under Greco-Roman rule.
>>929293
Yeah, right.
>>930069
>y axis is just "scientific advancement"
There are just more movies depicting the Roman empire. Ben Hur, Gladiator... any good flick depicting the Middle Ages? Don't think so.
>tfw no Medieval orgies with your mates
>>931240
Kingdom of Heaven Director's Cut
>>931240
> Anthony of Burgundy, the illegitimate son of Phillip the Good (duke of Burgundy as Philip III), commissioned this lavish manuscript from a prestigious Flemish painter known as the Master of Anthony of Burgundy.
>The illumination depicts a man in courtly garb and a king, perhaps Hannibal, observing debauchery in the baths. … The Master of Anthony of Burgundy chose to place the scene of luxury in a contemporary Flemish bath house or brothel rather than an ancient Roman one. Brothels with adjacent bath houses and public bath houses that also offered illicit prostitution were common in the late Middle Ages in France, the Low Countries, and Germany. Although prostitution was illegal in public bath houses, proprietors often overlooked the law (Otis, 2009). In at least one instance, however, one proprietor in Nîmes obtained permission to run two bath houses, one with a brothel and one without. Bath house-brothels earned a reputation for vice and licentiousness. >Gambling, theft, and drunkenness all appear as complaints in legal documents. Given the illicit status of most bath house brothels, the merging of bath and brothel in the Valerius Maximus manuscripts may have been a logical choice to demonstrate the essence of the vice of luxury.
there's illuminated text and a border around the page but only thumbnail view of that
https://inpress.lib.uiowa.edu/feminae/DetailsPage.aspx?Feminae_ID=32501
>>930849
There's a difference between a decline and a dark age. 1200-800 BC Greece, now that was a dark age. Or 450-750 in Britain.
