This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Dark Ages (historiography) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Auto-archiving period: 360 days |
Dark Ages (historiography) was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||
|
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 360 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
I'm talking here specifically about the usage of the term to denote "cultural decline", not about the usage referring to lack of sources: Right now, the article lists only reasons why denoting the Early Middle Ages as Dark Ages in this respect is all wrong, while listing none of the reasons for why someone might be inclined to use that term in the first place. We only find out that arrogant Enlightenment thinkers liked the term because it elevated their own time period, but that's about it. I'm not into history at all, but after searching around a bit I found this article which lists some of those reasons:
Now even that article explains why all of these don't necessarily indicate lower quality of life or cultural stagnation, but at least it lists them in the first place. Not mentioning any of these points here also plainly contradicts information in other related Wikipedia articles, e.g. Fall of the Western Roman Empire, where it is stated:
So on the whole, this article reads much like one of those sensationalist "Why Everything You Know About The Middle Ages Is Wrong" things on some virtual tabloid (and I had to wade through dozens of them to find the more balanced one I linked) and leaves out crucial information that would give the reader a more complete picture of history. -- 92.209.33.232 ( talk) 17:18, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
It reads as a Dark Ages apologist brochure that attempts to convey the dark ages weren’t so dark after all. It makes a point that people didn’t think the Earth was flat for instance.
But what readers really come to this article for is an explanation as to why no progress was made during the thousand prior to the Dark Ages when Eratosthenes in 300BC not only knew the world was round but calculated its circumference to within 2% of the actual figure using just two shadows.
To gloat with the fact that one thousand years later western society should be proud because they realized the Earth was round seems ridiculous.
Progress stopped. The age WAS dark and readers want to know why. 85.148.213.144 ( talk) 01:43, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, this article is absurdly biased, to the point of contradicting itself in view of the facts it itself adduces, showing that it describes a dogma, not a fact. What would convince fans of the Middle Ages that it (especially the early medieval period) was really a "dark age"? Nothing. They'll simply define it away, and will – deliberately or naively – spread untruths, like in the comment above. Richard Carrier, a bona fide expert on ancient science and technology, has debunked the ridiculous idea of an amazingly progressive medieval period again and again and again and again and again, and wrote two peer-reviewed books to demonstrate it in even more detail, yet boosters of the Middle Ages and Christianity keep ignoring the facts and claim a consensus that doesn't actually exist among actual historians. The real fact is that ancient science and technology was remarkably developed (more than even many medievalists seem to realise) and its level was never again reached, let alone transcended, until the Scientific Revolution in the 16th and especially the 17th century (whose luminaries constantly referred to ancient science, especially Roman science). Even the actual innovations of the medieval period (from glasses to the printing press) appeared only in the late medieval period (which transitions into the Early Renaissance in a way that makes demarcating them difficult), and several of them were imported from China. People keep quoting Rodney Stark (a Christian, by the way, no longer an agnostic) as an authority – but he's actually a sociologist (specifically of religion) who also works in the field of comparative religion, not a historian of science and technology.
It's true that research into the Middle Ages has significantly advanced in last 50 years or so – but so has research into antiquity. For example ( source: "Up to the late 20th century, the Roman economy was envisaged as slave-based [...], and the use of watermills was grossly underestimated. [...] It is now well established not only that Greco-Roman society excelled in hydraulic engineering [...] but also that a veritable revolution of waterpower affected the Roman Empire between the first and the third century CE [...]." Speaking of slave-based, slavery in ancient Rome was hardly more brutal (and in fact even became less so over time) than contemporary American capitalism, let alone serfdom in the Christian Late Antiquity and Middle Ages, which was just slavery by another name. -- Florian Blaschke ( talk) 12:32, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Dark Ages in Europe -- Green C 16:08, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
* '''Support''' per nominator. ~~~~
. You could optionally add more reasons why you support. The pages being deleted are in User: space. --
Green
C
22:57, 4 January 2022 (UTC)Unfortunately there were not enough knowledgeable participants to delete the pages, but I guess page blank is better than nothing. -- Green C 20:51, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
The recent change in the lead went too far in the direction of emphasizing present-day usage of the term. The article includes present-day usage, it's very important, but the article's primary purpose is a history of usage. Per WP:LEAD the section is meant to be a summary of the article and thus include, mostly, a history of usage. It's a terminology history article, not an essay concerning present-day usage. The original lead is in chronological order mirroring the structure of the article itself - a summarized mini-version of the article. -- Green C 21:05, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
Definition of dark age: [2]
References
I came here after reading about the bronze age, iron age, the bronze age dark age, and wondering about that time I remember from my childhood when knowledge was lost. I appreciate that's probably a too simplistic view but most articles like this would have some summary on the right giving a range of dates. I think it this case (even if it's odd for wikipedia, this should include similar concepts since that's what I presume most people are coming here for). I note that this comment is almost the opposite of one of the ones above that claims that this article is specialised for a very specific historic meaning, and maybe that's because I had a look at the disambiguation page and it mentioned this page as the lay person's understanding of the concept. Porco-esphino ( talk) 06:16, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
Bard's response by the way:
> The term "Dark Ages" is used to refer to the period of European history from the fall of the Western Roman Empire in 476 AD to the beginning of the Renaissance in the 14th century. The term was first used in the 16th century by Italian scholars who believed that this period was a time of cultural and intellectual decline. However, modern historians now view the Dark Ages as a time of great change and innovation, as Europe transitioned from the Roman Empire to a new medieval society.
> There is no single definition of the Dark Ages, and the exact dates of the period are debated by historians. However, most scholars agree that the Dark Ages began with the fall of the Western Roman Empire in 476 AD and ended with the beginning of the Renaissance in the 14th century.
> The fall of the Western Roman Empire was a major turning point in European history. The Roman Empire had provided a stable and unified political and economic system for much of Europe, and its collapse led to a period of chaos and instability. This chaos was exacerbated by the invasions of Germanic tribes, who migrated into Europe during this period.
> Despite the chaos and instability of the Dark Ages, there were also many positive developments during this time. For example, the Catholic Church became a major force in European society, and monasteries played an important role in preserving and transmitting knowledge. Additionally, there was a revival of learning in the 11th and 12th centuries, which led to the development of new universities and the flowering of medieval culture.
> The Dark Ages are often seen as a time of darkness and ignorance, but this view is now largely outdated. Modern historians now recognize that the Dark Ages were a time of great change and innovation, as Europe transitioned from the Roman Empire to a new medieval society.
It's really quite clear and although I can't tell how accurate a lot of it is, the dates at least line up and the context of these paragraphs means the article introduction makes a lot more sense to me, but still really needs a re-write — Preceding unsigned comment added by Porco-esphino ( talk • contribs) 06:21, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
In the numbers of volumes table, why is the number of volumes per century consistently one less than that indicated by the volume numbers? Ehrenkater ( talk) 07:13, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Dark Ages (historiography) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Auto-archiving period: 360 days |
Dark Ages (historiography) was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||
|
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 360 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
I'm talking here specifically about the usage of the term to denote "cultural decline", not about the usage referring to lack of sources: Right now, the article lists only reasons why denoting the Early Middle Ages as Dark Ages in this respect is all wrong, while listing none of the reasons for why someone might be inclined to use that term in the first place. We only find out that arrogant Enlightenment thinkers liked the term because it elevated their own time period, but that's about it. I'm not into history at all, but after searching around a bit I found this article which lists some of those reasons:
Now even that article explains why all of these don't necessarily indicate lower quality of life or cultural stagnation, but at least it lists them in the first place. Not mentioning any of these points here also plainly contradicts information in other related Wikipedia articles, e.g. Fall of the Western Roman Empire, where it is stated:
So on the whole, this article reads much like one of those sensationalist "Why Everything You Know About The Middle Ages Is Wrong" things on some virtual tabloid (and I had to wade through dozens of them to find the more balanced one I linked) and leaves out crucial information that would give the reader a more complete picture of history. -- 92.209.33.232 ( talk) 17:18, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
It reads as a Dark Ages apologist brochure that attempts to convey the dark ages weren’t so dark after all. It makes a point that people didn’t think the Earth was flat for instance.
But what readers really come to this article for is an explanation as to why no progress was made during the thousand prior to the Dark Ages when Eratosthenes in 300BC not only knew the world was round but calculated its circumference to within 2% of the actual figure using just two shadows.
To gloat with the fact that one thousand years later western society should be proud because they realized the Earth was round seems ridiculous.
Progress stopped. The age WAS dark and readers want to know why. 85.148.213.144 ( talk) 01:43, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, this article is absurdly biased, to the point of contradicting itself in view of the facts it itself adduces, showing that it describes a dogma, not a fact. What would convince fans of the Middle Ages that it (especially the early medieval period) was really a "dark age"? Nothing. They'll simply define it away, and will – deliberately or naively – spread untruths, like in the comment above. Richard Carrier, a bona fide expert on ancient science and technology, has debunked the ridiculous idea of an amazingly progressive medieval period again and again and again and again and again, and wrote two peer-reviewed books to demonstrate it in even more detail, yet boosters of the Middle Ages and Christianity keep ignoring the facts and claim a consensus that doesn't actually exist among actual historians. The real fact is that ancient science and technology was remarkably developed (more than even many medievalists seem to realise) and its level was never again reached, let alone transcended, until the Scientific Revolution in the 16th and especially the 17th century (whose luminaries constantly referred to ancient science, especially Roman science). Even the actual innovations of the medieval period (from glasses to the printing press) appeared only in the late medieval period (which transitions into the Early Renaissance in a way that makes demarcating them difficult), and several of them were imported from China. People keep quoting Rodney Stark (a Christian, by the way, no longer an agnostic) as an authority – but he's actually a sociologist (specifically of religion) who also works in the field of comparative religion, not a historian of science and technology.
It's true that research into the Middle Ages has significantly advanced in last 50 years or so – but so has research into antiquity. For example ( source: "Up to the late 20th century, the Roman economy was envisaged as slave-based [...], and the use of watermills was grossly underestimated. [...] It is now well established not only that Greco-Roman society excelled in hydraulic engineering [...] but also that a veritable revolution of waterpower affected the Roman Empire between the first and the third century CE [...]." Speaking of slave-based, slavery in ancient Rome was hardly more brutal (and in fact even became less so over time) than contemporary American capitalism, let alone serfdom in the Christian Late Antiquity and Middle Ages, which was just slavery by another name. -- Florian Blaschke ( talk) 12:32, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Dark Ages in Europe -- Green C 16:08, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
* '''Support''' per nominator. ~~~~
. You could optionally add more reasons why you support. The pages being deleted are in User: space. --
Green
C
22:57, 4 January 2022 (UTC)Unfortunately there were not enough knowledgeable participants to delete the pages, but I guess page blank is better than nothing. -- Green C 20:51, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
The recent change in the lead went too far in the direction of emphasizing present-day usage of the term. The article includes present-day usage, it's very important, but the article's primary purpose is a history of usage. Per WP:LEAD the section is meant to be a summary of the article and thus include, mostly, a history of usage. It's a terminology history article, not an essay concerning present-day usage. The original lead is in chronological order mirroring the structure of the article itself - a summarized mini-version of the article. -- Green C 21:05, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
Definition of dark age: [2]
References
I came here after reading about the bronze age, iron age, the bronze age dark age, and wondering about that time I remember from my childhood when knowledge was lost. I appreciate that's probably a too simplistic view but most articles like this would have some summary on the right giving a range of dates. I think it this case (even if it's odd for wikipedia, this should include similar concepts since that's what I presume most people are coming here for). I note that this comment is almost the opposite of one of the ones above that claims that this article is specialised for a very specific historic meaning, and maybe that's because I had a look at the disambiguation page and it mentioned this page as the lay person's understanding of the concept. Porco-esphino ( talk) 06:16, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
Bard's response by the way:
> The term "Dark Ages" is used to refer to the period of European history from the fall of the Western Roman Empire in 476 AD to the beginning of the Renaissance in the 14th century. The term was first used in the 16th century by Italian scholars who believed that this period was a time of cultural and intellectual decline. However, modern historians now view the Dark Ages as a time of great change and innovation, as Europe transitioned from the Roman Empire to a new medieval society.
> There is no single definition of the Dark Ages, and the exact dates of the period are debated by historians. However, most scholars agree that the Dark Ages began with the fall of the Western Roman Empire in 476 AD and ended with the beginning of the Renaissance in the 14th century.
> The fall of the Western Roman Empire was a major turning point in European history. The Roman Empire had provided a stable and unified political and economic system for much of Europe, and its collapse led to a period of chaos and instability. This chaos was exacerbated by the invasions of Germanic tribes, who migrated into Europe during this period.
> Despite the chaos and instability of the Dark Ages, there were also many positive developments during this time. For example, the Catholic Church became a major force in European society, and monasteries played an important role in preserving and transmitting knowledge. Additionally, there was a revival of learning in the 11th and 12th centuries, which led to the development of new universities and the flowering of medieval culture.
> The Dark Ages are often seen as a time of darkness and ignorance, but this view is now largely outdated. Modern historians now recognize that the Dark Ages were a time of great change and innovation, as Europe transitioned from the Roman Empire to a new medieval society.
It's really quite clear and although I can't tell how accurate a lot of it is, the dates at least line up and the context of these paragraphs means the article introduction makes a lot more sense to me, but still really needs a re-write — Preceding unsigned comment added by Porco-esphino ( talk • contribs) 06:21, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
In the numbers of volumes table, why is the number of volumes per century consistently one less than that indicated by the volume numbers? Ehrenkater ( talk) 07:13, 1 June 2024 (UTC)