Re: Were the Dark Ages a time of chaos?

Charlie Wilkes <charlie_wilkes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Fair points but that is only part of the discussion. The poster was
talking shifting political boundaries and the predation of the strong
against the weak! Just because a society couldn't or didn't write their
histoy down and didn't or couldn't build massive public constructions it
surely doesn't mean that it was therefore obviously a more chaotic time?

What else accounts for those deficits, i.e., not writing history down

One thing at a time. With the coversion of Rome to Christianity
something new came into the world. The Church viewed all those
secular works as a waste of time. The only true vocation for men
was to study God, to do God's work, and mainly, to pray. The
best guarantee of salvation was to join a monastery.

Thus the writing of secular history took a back seat to the writing
of Church history. You have no idea how many eclesiastical histories
and books of the lives of the saints were written during the so-called
dark ages.

and
not building/maintaining public works? It is a cliche that Roman
standards of sanitation were not equaled in Europe until the 19th
Century. So why did Europeans stop building sewers after the Roman order
collapsed? I can't believe it was because they wanted to live in more
primitive conditions than had been the norm a few generations earlier.
It was more likely because technical skills were lost, public
institutions were in disarray, and the money wasn't there because war and
pillage had cratered the economy.

Wait a minute. First, in most of the former Empire, many of those
public works were maintained. There is not a former part of the
Empire in western Europe that *still* does not have preserved Roman
works such as baths, public buildings and sewers.

Second, as I mentioned, the center of power moved to the north.
The north of western Europe was never as heavily populated as
other regions of the Empire. Large cities did not exist. A
town of a few thousand was huge. Such towns did not need
extensive water works, just for example.

Again, look at the geography. Water is relatively scarce in
regions along the Mediterranean. It is plentiful in the north.
Indeed, it was so available that nobody could think of building
aqueducts. Why would they want to?

Third, the Roman economy ceased to exist. When the folks with
money stop paying taxes, the government suffered. This has some
modern implications but let's not go there. In the Empire the
public purse was kept separate from the private money of the
Emperor. In the new nations, the rulers considered *everything*
to be their personal property. Thus all money went into their
pockets and there was no government money.

This lead to very different views on what constituted a good
reason to spend money.

I don't wish to be a pain in the ass, but... I wonder if the "modern"
outlook on history hasn't been influenced by cultural relativism, i.e.,
the tendency to assume that sociological value judgments reflect
subjective prejudice rather than real, observed differences in quality.
Hadrian, after all, was born with a silver spoon in his mouth. But
Attila the Hun probably had to fight for everything he got, so who are we
to say that Hadrian was more civilized than Attila?

Whoa. I would suggest that those that think that modern civilization
is the only way to go are the ones sufferng from value judgements
reflecting subjective prejudice.

The entire western medieval value system was very different than
anything we have. For example how many of us would feel that it
is better to die young with honor than to die old with shame?


Imagine yourself, living in the same house you do now... only it is 100
years into the future. Your house still has plumbing and wiring, but you
have no tap water or sewerage or electricity, nor is anyone available who
can provide those services. So you haul your water from a public well,
you light your house with candles, and your sanitary facilities consist
of an outhouse in the back yard. What has happened in the intervening
years to about those changes? Are they the result of an orderly, even
progressive social dynamic, or are they the result of utter chaos and
calamity?

I don't know what you are saying here. Do you think that *all* homes
in Roman England had running water?

And be careful, the conditions you are describing would work very
well for most of America in 1890 -- which was not so long ago.
My grandfather was 15 in 1890...

The modern world is very different than it was in 1890. We have
tons more "stuff". Are we happier?

What if the Dark Ages really were dark?

What does "dark" mean to you?

--
--- Paul J. Gans
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Were the Dark Ages a time of chaos?
    ...  So why did Europeans stop building sewers after the Roman ... Empire in western Europe that *still* does not have preserved Roman ... money stop paying taxes, the government suffered. ... An advantage of the Georgian system ...
    (soc.history.medieval)
  • Re: Were the Dark Ages a time of chaos?
    ... Church history. ... So why did Europeans stop building sewers after the Roman ... There is not a former part of the Empire ... When the folks with money ...
    (soc.history.medieval)
  • Re: Were the Dark Ages a time of chaos?
    ...  So why did Europeans stop building sewers after the Roman ... Empire in western Europe that *still* does not have preserved Roman ... was kept separate from the private money of the Emperor. ... the Georgian system provides people with a better knowledge on ...
    (soc.history.medieval)
  • Re: Reverse Continual Flame Spell
    ... As with many other more haphazard Empires the mongol one ... The mongol empire was divided by mutual agreement ... >> We're talking about a period of Roman rule, ... the multi storey insulae with ventilation, piped water and even private ...
    (rec.games.frp.dnd)
  • Re: Were the Dark Ages a time of chaos?
    ... So why did Europeans stop building sewers after the Roman ... Water is relatively scarce in regions ... When the folks with money ... Where did I mention modern civilization? ...
    (soc.history.medieval)
Loading