- This topic has 38 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 2 weeks, 4 days ago by
.
-
Posts
-
To me, the Dark Ages are dark for a fairly specific reason. We know that in 410 Roman Britain got rid of the imperial officials, and that by the end of the 'dark' period there had been major changes, especially huge linguistic ones, with Germanic and Goidelic apparently at some point replacing British and Latin over very large areas. What is especially 'dark' about the intervening period is the extraordinary racist codswallop that has been thrown in to cover the lack of documentation – codswallop that would seem to defy most of what can be known from archaeology and genetics. Somehow the Romano-British got themselves replaced by some other people called 'Celts' who (they obviously had good chauffeurs) spent their time being 'driven' to all sorts of places, all the three to four millions of them, by what looks likely to have been a few thousand Germans. I doubt , and I do not believe Bede's sources were up to much, or that Gildas was any sort of a historian.
Could it not be that England was just not that great a place for Roman generals to start/end their careers? Hadrian built that wall there for a reason….he knew the hostiles were not likely ever to assimilate into Roman culture, and he was not about to spend the resources necessary to assimilate them. To be blunt, Rome conquered Britannia just because it was there, and once they did, they did not value it enough to hold onto it.
'England' didn't exist, of course, and a normal proportion of the British were Roman citizens for a very long time, the Province/provinces being perculiarly prosperous in the third century. When they ceased to be useful to the British Romans, the imperial officials were hoofed out in 410, and Britania Prima, in particular, got on very well for several generations thereafter.
I used “England” for simplicity because that's what we call it now and because I don't like typing “Britannia.” 🙂
I used “England” for simplicity because that's what we call it now and because I don't like typing “Britannia.” 🙂
Well, I never use it thus, because I come from Britannia, not England, a country that does not wholly enthuse me. 'England' is the flat bit on the right. 🙂
The only 2 things that ever came out of England that were any good were 1.) America and 2.) Led Zeppelin 🙂
The only 2 things that ever came out of England that were any good were 1.) America and 2.) Led Zeppelin 🙂
I couldn't possibly comment! 😉
The points to consider that have not been brought up is that “Dark Ages” might not be a pejorative used to describe the lack of intellectual or social progress during this time (c. 500-1000), but instead to describe the lack of academic knowledge we have of it. It’s vastly easier to study civilizations and people when they produce much written or visual content, but not so easy when they don’t leave as many permanent testaments to their way of life and their thinking. Quite obviously, the people of the Early Medieval period left us plenty, but compared to other periods, it likely contains more gaps in our knowledge and leaves us with more unknowns.
Hence the descriptor, “dark”.
