← Back to context

Comment by dismalaf

6 hours ago

> There is a clear phase in our history which was long and no progress was made "Dark age".

The Dark Ages are kind of a myth. The Eastern Roman Empire (aka. Byzantine Empire) existed through the whole time period up to the beginning of the Renaissance. And while some parts of Western Europe were "dark" (mainly due to Viking and Islamic invasions), Western Europe wasn't and isn't the whole world.

The Dark Ages are dark, because they lack surviving written record; ironically due to advancements in writing technology, where people would begin writing on hides instead of papyrus or chisel stone; this made writing a lot faster, but also had a far shorter life span, particularly because people could wipe the hide clean (after the text was of no use), and then rewrite on it.

Conversely, a lot of the writings of the Antiquity are preserved, in large part due to Middle Eastern scholars. The Dark Ages aren't a myth, but rather what is meant by "dark" is misunderstood.

  • No, the whole thing is some sort of revisonist history gambit. The Dark Ages were "dark" because they represented a massive and lasting decline in social organization, trade, and yes, literacy. These are all extremely well documented. You can see it in basically any field you want -

The invention of the "dark ages" is really interesting, and afaik it was created in order to create a "this time it's different" sense of ahistoricity. Very similar to the "year zero" idea in communism, and even the current AI hype cycle.