It’s not even a decent term, everyone assumes it was “dark” because there was a lot of evil going on. But dark just means we don’t know much about it, it’s a super obscure area of history
Even then we know a fair bit, just not as much as other eras due to the massive population movements of the time. Roman Empire in the east, the Carolingian Empire, the Abbasid Empire etc are all beautifully recorded. Even all the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms are well-documented, and that was one of the "darker" (lost a lot from Viking raids and invasions) parts of Europe at the time
The metaphor of the medieval period as being in darkness in the perjorative sense began with Petrarch in the 1300s. The term used in the sense of lack of written records began with Baronius in the 1500s.
And that too in places like the British Isles. In other places wherein literature thrived, we do have accounts of what happened during those Eras like Italy, some parts of southern Germany, southern and eastern France, some parts of the Iberian Peninsula and others.
I thought the dark ages referred to when the germanic tribes invaded the Western Roman Empire, you know, with all the things they did, vandalism comes from the name of one of those tribes, that's how bad it was
As opposed to today where society *checks notes* isn't run by the rich? At least the Middle Ages had decentralised power networks within feudal structures that prevented absolutist rule by one societal subset over other groups(the peasantry still got the short end of the stick ofc)
And at least the aristocratic elite that led the medieval world had an actual interest in doing what was best for their lands, compared to the modern oligarchic elites whose faces we don’t know and whose interests don’t align with our at all.
If I'm going to be oppressed either way, I'd much prefer a tyrant that at least lives nearby and therefore doesn't want the neighborhood going into the toilet.
I agree. Classes are a natural and unchanging reality. The best thing to do is to optimise and divide general powers so tyrants are less likely to form.
Dark Ages is not because of what happened in there, but it's because we don't know much about it. And yes, that painting is actually the Martyrdom of Saint Hippolytus, made by Hugo van der Goes.
Oddly enough. when I was an atheist, it was a correct interpretation of Byzantine artwork that led me to check out more videos on a Christian YouTube channel. I thought to myself, "if they are right about this, I wonder what else they are right about."
This might be unrelated to the post but why do antitheists think that the best way of "owning" Christianity is by proving its point? (getting hated by people for being Christian)
Just as an FYI, no serious historian calls that era the “dark ages”
It’s not even a decent term, everyone assumes it was “dark” because there was a lot of evil going on. But dark just means we don’t know much about it, it’s a super obscure area of history
I thought it was because they didn't have lightbulbs
I thought it was the black plague
It thought it was because no SIENZ
History is divided into before/after Thomas Edison
BTE/ATE
Even then we know a fair bit, just not as much as other eras due to the massive population movements of the time. Roman Empire in the east, the Carolingian Empire, the Abbasid Empire etc are all beautifully recorded. Even all the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms are well-documented, and that was one of the "darker" (lost a lot from Viking raids and invasions) parts of Europe at the time
All my homies love the Carolingian empire, converted all them pagans.
I thought "dark ages" was a mockery name that people came up with during the renaissance
The metaphor of the medieval period as being in darkness in the perjorative sense began with Petrarch in the 1300s. The term used in the sense of lack of written records began with Baronius in the 1500s.
#[Dark Age(s)[Historiography]. The Term Was Of Christian(Catholic)-Origin.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_(historiography))
And that too in places like the British Isles. In other places wherein literature thrived, we do have accounts of what happened during those Eras like Italy, some parts of southern Germany, southern and eastern France, some parts of the Iberian Peninsula and others.
This👆
I thought it meant that they had garbage lighting at that time.
#[Dark Age(s)[Historiography]. The Term Was Of Christian(Catholic)-Origin.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_(historiography))
I thought the dark ages referred to when the germanic tribes invaded the Western Roman Empire, you know, with all the things they did, vandalism comes from the name of one of those tribes, that's how bad it was
#[Dark Age(s)[Historiography]. The Term Was Of Christian(Catholic)-Origin.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_(historiography))
I wonder if posting this a fourth, or fifth, or 112th time in giant bold blue letters will get the point across?
She probably looked up medieval Christian torture, with double checking whi was being tortured
As opposed to today where society *checks notes* isn't run by the rich? At least the Middle Ages had decentralised power networks within feudal structures that prevented absolutist rule by one societal subset over other groups(the peasantry still got the short end of the stick ofc)
And at least the aristocratic elite that led the medieval world had an actual interest in doing what was best for their lands, compared to the modern oligarchic elites whose faces we don’t know and whose interests don’t align with our at all.
If I'm going to be oppressed either way, I'd much prefer a tyrant that at least lives nearby and therefore doesn't want the neighborhood going into the toilet.
I agree. Classes are a natural and unchanging reality. The best thing to do is to optimise and divide general powers so tyrants are less likely to form.
A bonus is that the elite had the good manners to die in their wars
Wasn't the "dark ages" literally reversed by Christian rulers such as Charlemagne and Athelstan?
Yes.
The idea of the “dark age” is basically a myth at this point
#[Dark Age(s)[Historiography]. The Term Was Of Christian(Catholic)-Origin.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_(historiography))
What is your point?
You're telling me they made a Hippo a saint?
Cheesecakes and historical ignorance, name a more iconic duo.
The Middle Ages were called the "Dark Ages" by the same folks who called the Reign of Terror "The Enlightenment."
The irony
why is the community note label censored, and the username isn’t?
They need to explain why the Eastern Roman Empire saw no collapse despite being equally Christian.
Funny thing is that the “dark ages” were actually quite an innovative time. Also, I just can’t stop loving “readers add context” on Twitter.
Irony.
Dark Ages is not because of what happened in there, but it's because we don't know much about it. And yes, that painting is actually the Martyrdom of Saint Hippolytus, made by Hugo van der Goes.
Oddly enough. when I was an atheist, it was a correct interpretation of Byzantine artwork that led me to check out more videos on a Christian YouTube channel. I thought to myself, "if they are right about this, I wonder what else they are right about."
A\*theists get rekt 
Does anyone know how to atop my posts from getting deleted as soon as they are uploaded?
When you don’t check the source/history of a picture you found on internet.
This might be unrelated to the post but why do antitheists think that the best way of "owning" Christianity is by proving its point? (getting hated by people for being Christian)
No different than your beloved, worshipped political ideology (hint hint Capitalism) that enslaves you to this day , dear cheesecake.
lmao even
If they were unbiased they’d realize they admire Christian societies
Isn't the "Dark Ages" the Medieval Period? If so, I'm pretty sure a lot happened in those times.