The Dark Ages

I am of the mind that this period in time is a sham

well whenever i try to find actual written records from this period I can find nothing i dont think there is a gap in history I just think it didnt happen and it is one of the greatest conspiracies in history. What I wonder is what their covering up to enact such a conspiracy that is global in its extent.

Originally posted by tigpoppa
I am of the mind that this period in time is a sham

well whenever i try to find actual written records from this period I can find nothing i dont think there is a gap in history I just think it didnt happen and it is one of the greatest conspiracies in history. What I wonder is what their covering up to enact such a conspiracy that is global in its extent.

Without going to my books, I can submit that the term Dark Ages is a misnomer as there was actually a lot of culture flowering during that period. I'm not sure that it suggests a conspiracy given the information available about the medieval days...but don't let me hinder your search for info.

Sorry but I had to laugh at the idea of an entire chunk of history simply not existing, obviously something happened then!

It seems logical that written records would be hard to find for the period, what with the roman empire falling apart and all but there must be some info out there.

A breif timeline of the early dark ages, from a mostly British POV. I'd love to look into this more but it could take a while.

reply to post by tigpoppa

The term "Dark Ages" actually means "we don't know much about them".
Bear in mind what was happening; the Roman Empire had just collapsed, administration was very "ad hoc", there were men fighting all over the place. The result was that records were not being kept. As you point out, there is a shortage of written information. That's precisely why the period was given that label.
As JohnnyCanuck rightly points out, there was no shortage of culture in the people themselves. "Dark" is a description of our state of mind, as historians, not a description of their's.
As far as England is concerned, there is Bede's history. Obviously from the viewpoint of the invaders.

reply to post by DISRAELI


what so the whole of mankind just forgot how to write?
i find that conclusion very illogical

Though it is what I have heard all my life as the excuse for the time period. though i think this is just something people are told and then repeat like parrots to further continue the conspiracy. Much like all conspiracies the people need a line to repeat in order to propagate the conspiracy further and keep it alive. from lee harvey oswald, to the gold of tonkin the list goes on and on.

reply to post by tigpoppa


I don't think you're paying attention; people didn't just forget how to write. They did not have the capacity and time for writing because the whole Western world was in turmoil. Of what people still managed, we just don't have many of the records. This could be because around the end of the Dark Ages there occurred a series of events related to the inquisition. This was a time of the destruction of learning and so on; Most of the records from the period have been destroyed by short-sighted idiots.

Also, where exactly are you looking for these records? Did you consider checking African, Middle-Eastern, and Asian records? because I could guarantee you that those exist. I'm betting you're going full Eurocentric.

Look at this, a bunch of writings from the 6th-9th centuries, the period which historians call the Dark AGes now.

en.wikipedia.org...

[edit on 18-3-2010 by Solasis]

On a similar topic, can anyone remember the name of that Historiographer who holds basically this theory? That human history is about 1000 years shorter than we think, and the records have just been doubled up?

Ah, I found it. The Phantom Time Hypothesis.

en.wikipedia.org...

OP, I'll bet you've heard of it. I do find it quite interesting, and I'd encourage us to talk about it!

[edit on 18-3-2010 by Solasis]

I can see what your getting at, this was the time when christianity gained its stranglehold on the 'civillized' world. From what I've read this involved a lot of book burning and general 'out with the old...' sort of stuff.

On a lighter note, I have just been to check my copy of "1066 and All That", which explains the whole thing very clearly. Or maybe not.
"The withdrawal of the Roman legions...(due to a clamour among the Romans for pompous amusements such as bread and circumstances) left Britain defenceless, and subjected Europe to that long succession of Waves of which history is chiefly composed. While the Roman Empire was overrun by waves not only of Ostrogoths, Visigoths,and even of Goths, but also of Vandals (who destroyed works of art) and Huns (who destroyed everything and everybody, including Goths, Ostrogoths, Visigoths, and even Vandals), Britain was attacked by waves of Picts (and, of course, Scots), and of Angles, Saxons, and Jutes,who, landing at Thanet, soon overran the country with fire (and, of course, the sword)...
The brutal Saxon invaders drove the Britons westward into Wales and compelled them to become Welsh; it is now considered doubtful whether this was a Good Thing."
Hope that helps.

Originally posted by tigpoppa
I am of the mind that this period in time is a sham

well whenever i try to find actual written records from this period I can find nothing i dont think there is a gap in history I just think it didnt happen and it is one of the greatest conspiracies in history. What I wonder is what their covering up to enact such a conspiracy that is global in its extent.

Hmmm....

Well I just found this. You see in England there is was a monk named Gildas..

Gildas

Saint Gildas (c. 500 – 570) was a 6th-century British cleric. He is one of the best-documented figures of the Christian church in the British Isles during this period. His renowned learning and literary style earned him the designation Gildas Sapiens (Gildas the Wise). His work De Excidio et Conquestu Britanniae, which contains narratives of the post-Roman history of Britain, is the only substantial source for history of this period written by a near-contemporary

You can read his whole text at the link below. It was written during the period.

On The Ruin of Britain (De Excidio Britanniae) by Gildas

So there you go, a historic record written in the dark ages.

Originally posted by tigpoppa
reply to post by DISRAELI

 

what so the whole of mankind just forgot how to write?
i find that conclusion very illogical

Who said that is the case? Whilst the Anglo-Saxon corpus of texts isn't as big as any Old English scholar would like, the idea that 'mankind' just forgot how to write is pretty idiotic. If there's any conclusion here that's illogical, then it's yours. If anything, there was actually a flowering of culture, it's just that it wasn't the Roman culture that preceded it which was seen as a benchmark for many things from the late middle-ages onwards.

Though it is what I have heard all my life as the excuse for the time period. though i think this is just something people are told and then repeat like parrots to further continue the conspiracy. Much like all conspiracies the people need a line to repeat in order to propagate the conspiracy further and keep it alive. from lee harvey oswald, to the gold of tonkin the list goes on and on.

I think that, rather a grand conspiracy about the Dark Ages, the real problem is that people don't actually know anything about the history that is there and is known about.

Originally posted by Frogs
Hmmm....

Well I just found this. You see in England there is was a monk named Gildas..

Gildas

Saint Gildas (c. 500 – 570) was a 6th-century British cleric. He is one of the best-documented figures of the Christian church in the British Isles during this period. His renowned learning and literary style earned him the designation Gildas Sapiens (Gildas the Wise). His work De Excidio et Conquestu Britanniae, which contains narratives of the post-Roman history of Britain, is the only substantial source for history of this period written by a near-contemporary

You can read his whole text at the link below. It was written during the period.

On The Ruin of Britain (De Excidio Britanniae) by Gildas

So there you go, a historic record written in the dark ages.

Not to mention the various Anglo Saxon Chronicle manuscripts. They're obviously part of the same conspiracy.

What about epidemic disseases ? Like the plague or something.

In the time period itself there were probably only a few who could read and write. if they died...

Originally posted by Sinter Klaas
What about epidemic disseases ? Like the plague or something.

In the time period itself there were probably only a few who could read and write. if they died...

The Justinian Plague was thought to have wiped out half of Europe and was accompanied by some fantastically bad weather possibly caused by volcanic activity which would have had a massive impact of populations (literate and illiterate). However, the Dark Ages generally were actually a time of great scholarship and some of the most beautiful books ever created were put together during the so called Anglo-Saxon 'Dark Age'.

this dark age extends outside of europe,

seems that from what i understand the church somehow was fudging with the calendar that whole figuring out a year zero thing that newton later worked on.

in any event they messed up hence the dark ages are a fabrication of history.

Many people enjoy reciting the lines they learn during their indoctrination into higher education, now lets apply that higher level of thinking.

in asian counries and among other cultures the written record is consistent even through plagues and natural disasters, yet in europe there seems to be a huge gap in the actual timeline.

Many historians offer their OPINIONS on why it is that way, which is fine, opinions help us to find answers to the actual question. I would prefer to focus on the why which has never gotten answers from any historian. There is no answer, hence why its just a con. A con that also only had roots in areas where the church held a large interest, coincidence? I dont believe in coincidences, their for hopeless dreamers and children.

reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
Hiya JC...long time, no see. I agree, 'dark ages' is a misnomer. It's a term that has lingered from the 19th Century and is way too regional to have meaning. Ignoring the fact that Europe wasn't in a 'dark age,' the Middle East was enjoying a renaissance.

Dark ages is a Western cultural artifact...BS in other words.

reply to post by tigpoppa


If it's true that there is no historical gap in Asian records, how can you say that the dark age extends outside of europe? Do you mean to the Middle East or Africa or something?

Has anyone ever compared the astronomical records of the approximate same times in Asia to those in Europe, so that we can tell if there really were a few hundred years added in?

Originally posted by Solasis
This could be because around the end of the Dark Ages there occurred a series of events related to the inquisition. This was a time of the destruction of learning and so on; Most of the records from the period have been destroyed by short-sighted idiots.

Man, what are you on about? The inquisition was a LONG time after the so-called Dark Ages.

As has been said, the term Dark Ages is not only a misnomer, I never hear it even mentioned nowadays when discussing the period 600-1000 AD.

For starters, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles go into quite alot of detail for the period with regards to British history. Simliar documents exist for other places in europe. Then there are Church records, monuments, archaeological evidence.....

This time period is actually of great interest to me and there is a WEALTH of information about the period. I think the OP should spend some time actually researching the period.

reply to post by DISRAELI


It's quite doubtful that the Anglo-Saxons "replaced" anybody bar the ruling elite and it certainly wasn't an invasion. They were originally in Britain as mercenaries for the Romano-British leaders after the legions left. Either they didn't get paid or saw an opportunity and they took control. Genetic evidence shows the bulk of the English population is the same ethnic group of people that has lived here since before the Romans arrived.

There is no "conspiracy" with regards to this period. It is well documented and a very rich, interesting period of history. Anyone who claims otherwise is a fool, especially if they really think we're "missing" few centuries. It's just the hieight of laziness to make such claims when a wealth of information about this period is at your fingertips.

[edit on 19/3/10 by stumason]

Originally posted by tigpoppa
reply to post by DISRAELI

 

what so the whole of mankind just forgot how to write?
i find that conclusion very illogical

Remember, back in those days the vast majority of people were completely illiterate. Even the fairly well to do could neither read or write.

Only a very few scholars could read and write.

Also, there were no mass printed books at all, no newspapers.
The only records kept were all laboriously and individually hand written, and were very few and far between, even then.

Nobody sat down for weeks, months, or years keeping continuous public records, unless someone paid them to do it.
Monks were about the only people copying and preserving ancient texts, and most of them lived in pious seclusion anyway. Their interest was a very narrow one.

But the problem with this, was that the (known) world was in serious economic decline, sort of a long lasting economic depression.

So everything slowed down. There were no vast fortunes being spent on architecture, culture, or science. So the historic records sort of disappear into a black hole of barbarous non existence.

Contrast that with the Renaissance period in Italy, which was the exact extreme opposite.
Extreme wealth and affluence, a massive output of art, science, literature and architecture.

[edit on 19/3/2010 by Silver Shadow]

Originally posted by stumason
Man, what are you on about? The inquisition was a LONG time after the so-called Dark Ages.

As has been said, the term Dark Ages is not only a misnomer, I never hear it even mentioned nowadays when discussing the period 600-1000 AD.

From Wikipedia:

The Medieval Inquisition is a series of Inquisitions (Catholic Church bodies charged with suppressing heresy) from around 1184,

It didn't just pop up, and what is called "The Dark Ages" didn't just end in 1000 AD. I admit it was unfounded speculation, but the timeline is close enough to be relevant, if not explanatory. Besides, I admitted it wasn't founded when I said it; "It could be".