>>/40409/
> Dark ages has largely fallen out of use among academics
have to say (who?) in here.
> . There never was a Dark Age,
there was, be it mathematics, engineering, free thinking, religious tolerance, geography I think pretty much everything regress, it's borderline madness to call it evolution. not to mention history is not linear, there can be golden ages and dark ages it's not a straight line like for example marx suggests.
> Part of the reason they used to call it that was because of the lack of literature from the era
this pretty much disregard every other regression.
> antiquity spans a huge time frame
why would you take entire antiquity? you take greco-roman heritage in the account and compare to them and when you compare you can see the dark ages.
> , yet we have very little from the time written about it
You know in antiquity many things were written it's just we barely know them and we know many of them thanks to other scripts refere them, they might be lost, they might be burn down by certain desert cult, smashing down the statues.
Not to mention high literacy rate and free thinking is completely disregarded amongst other things. I'm not even going to point out why the high literacy rate if noone writes a thing, good luck claiming they learned how to read for graffitis.
> they also never fell out of circulation
aristo socrates and pre-socrates thinkers pretty much disregared or forgotten. even aristo reintroduced in 1000's and this would have never happened if not for christianity and fall or WRE.
> Most of what she had she stole.
I cringe I'm not gonna lie because this claim is simply absurd. Most inventions are already based on other inventions, claiming this is, I think clear way to say "I don't know how inventions work."
I don't want to turn it into personal, but what say say is very absurd and plainly wrong.