Was there civilization before Christianity?

[Elysian]

Pederasty was common in Greek/roman cultures, people were used as slaves in Egypt, India and china had barbaric laws regardng women, and so on.

So my question is, did civilization as we know it start with Christianity?

[Red Noob]

It all depends on social context. What is civilized in one person's eyes is barbaric in another's. Define your view of civilization.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

Hell the fuck no, in my very humble opinion. Civilization predates Christianity by thousands of years, at least.

The breaking with practices such as slavery and discrimination can be traced to the enlightenment, which was a break from a strictly christian way of thinking. If Christianity is responsible for anything, it is responsible for the dark ages, and all the crusades and inquisitions that occurred as well.

[tfb]

Thank god Christianity swept away pederasty!

[bcbm]

Pederasty was common in Greek/roman cultures, people were used as slaves in Egypt, India and china had barbaric laws regardng women, and so on.

So my question is, did civilization as we know it start with Christianity?

christianity had pederasty, slavery and barbaric laws regarding women so not sure what you're getting at.

civlization is defined by the existence of writingm adanvaced political instituions, division of labor, um agriculture maybe? and some other shit i dont remember but yeah civilizzation started basically in the fertile crescent about 10000 yars ago

[bcbm]

The breaking with practices such as slavery and discrimination can be traced to the enlightenment, which was a break from a strictly christian way of thinking. If Christianity is responsible for anything, it is responsible for the dark ages,

i think tha was mroe related to the fall of the western roman empire


and all the crusades

more of a political manuever than religious

[Red Commissar]

Pederasty was common in Greek/roman cultures, people were used as slaves in Egypt, India and china had barbaric laws regardng women, and so on.

So my question is, did civilization as we know it start with Christianity?

I'm not sure if it's as clear cut like that. While Christianity and other religions definitely served to provide a legal structure for some societies, it served more in this capacity to supplement and enhance existing structures rather than create new ones all together. Most of humanity were running legal systems, had 'civilizations' in the sense of people coming together into settlements of some sort bound by certain codes of ethics.

A rather interesting perspective from this regarding the colonization of the Americas, which had brought 'civilization' to 'barbaric' societies by way of European systems and Christianity, in this case the Incas:




We found these kingdoms in such good order, and the said Incas governed them in such wise [manner] that throughout them there was not a thief, nor a vicious man, nor an adulteress, nor was a bad woman admitted among them, nor were there immoral people. The men had honest and useful occupations. The lands, forests, mines, pastures, houses and all kinds of products were regulated and distributed in such sort that each one knew his property without any other person seizing it or occupying it, nor were there law suits respecting it… the motive which obliges me to make this statement is the discharge of my conscience, as I find myself guilty. For we have destroyed by our evil example, the people who had such a government as was enjoyed by these natives. They were so free from the committal of crimes or excesses, as well men as women, that the Indian who had 100,000 pesos worth of gold or silver in his house, left it open merely placing a small stick against the door, as a sign that its master was out. With that, according to their custom, no one could enter or take anything that was there. When they saw that we put locks and keys on our doors, they supposed that it was from fear of them, that they might not kill us, but not because they believed that anyone would steal the property of another. So that when they found that we had thieves among us, and men who sought to make their daughters commit sin, they despised us."


Markham, Sir Clements. The Incas of Peru, 2nd ed pg 300

[The Young Pioneer]

Did civilisation begin with Christianity? Yes. This day in history, 2011 years ago (give or take another 33, not sure how all that AD shit works), Jesus popped out of Mary and said, "Hey, this isn't a cave, but a barn, and this isn't some random spot on earth, but rather something that shall henceforth be known as a 'city' called 'Bethlehem.' Behold, neanderthals, I am the Christ, bearing your sins and the creation of civilisation!"


Really, though, wtf kinda question..? :confused:

[CommunityBeliever]

Civilization arose about 10,000 years ago. The fictional work known as the "Christian bible" wasn't produced until 8,000 years later.

[bcbm]

Civilization arose about 10,000 years ago. The fictional work known as the "Christian bible" wasn't produced until 8,000 years later.

the old testament is older than that

[Rusty Shackleford]

I think the basic formula for a 'civilization' is the existence of a state and class.

other than that, society has existed as long as humans.

[Zostrianos]

Christianity not only made very little difference, it made things a lot worse in many aspects. In late antiquity, the triumph of Christianity over the institutions of imperial power brought about the destruction of other religions and philosophies, demolition of temples, and persecution of non Christians. Especially from the time of Justinian onward, philosophical schools were closed, pagan philosophy was repressed in favour of Christianity, and thousands of people were killed for refusing to convert to Christianity (or simply for being non Christians). I addressed a lot of this in another thread, here's part of a previous post:

Both women and slaves were treated better in the Pagan cults than they were in the church. Women could become priestesses in most cults, and there were many Goddesses they could turn to. Whereas in the church, they weren't even allowed to speak. With regard to slaves, in spite of the social strata excluding them from the rest of society, they were allowed access to nearly all temples, worshipping side by side with the free, and many went on to create their own congregations (Macmullen, Christianity and Paganism 7). Also, “Christian leaders….looked down on those beneath them with the same hauteur as their non-Christian equivalents” In addition, regarding the hardships endured by slaves under Pagan emperors, they may have been harsh, but “nothing indicates that they were made easier by Christian masters” (Macmullen 7). Furthermore, in the 5th century, pope Leo forbade the admission of slaves to the priesthood, because their “vileness” would pollute the holy office.

Additionally, religiously motivated violence was almost unheard of outside of Monotheism before Christianity came along, and as soon as the church gained enough power, factional violence and mass murder began:

"Our sources for the two and a quarter centuries following Nicaea allow a very rough count of the victims of credal differences: not less than twenty five thousand deaths. A great many, but still only a small minority, were clergy; the rest, participants in crowds...All those who died met their end irregularly as targets of fury, not of legal action. Of bishops who died for their faith while in the custody of the secular powers, the examples can be counted on the fingers of one hand." (R. Macmullen "Voting about God in early church councils", p 56) "

Also, “the century opened by the Peace of the Church, more Christians died for their faith at the hands of fellow Christians than had died before in all the persecutions.” (R. Macmullen: Christianity & Paganism in the Fourth to Eighth Centuries. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1997, p 14)

And later when Africa and the America's were colonized, slavery was justified by appealing to the Bible, where it is permitted and even encouraged. The innumerable crimes committed by the Church (inquisition, destruction of native culture in the Americas, mass murder between Catholics and Protestants in the 16th century, etc......) were all brought about in the name of Christianity.
True Christianity as preached by Jesus, was a faith that died a few decades after being established, thanks to the corruption of those who claimed to preserve it. Our modern morality and ethical sense owes largely to Enlightenment and secular values, not to Christianity.

[RGacky3]

No, and its kind of douchy to even assume that, either your totally ignorant of history or your a bigot.

I mean seriously, have you heard of the middle ages?

The inherent bigotry in that question is astounding.

[Zealot]

Fuck no. We literally had to shove religion aside and bring in secularism just to civilize some of these religious barbarians. Even that hasn't worked for some of them. Not to mention, science didn't get to where its at without a fight against the savages and even now they're still trying to interfere with the teaching of evolution and other sciences. And if you're implying Christians didn't have barbaric attitudes regarding women you have a lot of learning to do.

And this is what pisses me off with some Christians and Euro-centric bigots in general who seem to think that everyone was living in pig shit until Christians came along to civilize everything. The fact is, Christian "civilization", if we can even call it that, would at times have looked like a complete joke in comparison to real civilizations. Literally it would have looked like a bunch of savage barbarians got together and claimed to have a great civilization. Get your head out of that Bible and into the history class is my advice.

[bcbm]

barbarians were often more humane and egalitarian than civlized people duder

[Thirsty Crow]

Pederasty was common in Greek/roman cultures, people were used as slaves in Egypt, India and china had barbaric laws regardng women, and so on.

So my question is, did civilization as we know it start with Christianity?
Civilization as we know it amounts to the stationary way of life, the invention of and employment of agriculture, and the "alphabet" (writing systems). That's what we call civilization, though in my opinion the term carries much weight inherited from the colonial and imperialist past. So no, civilization didn't start with christianity.

[Zostrianos]

No, and its kind of douchy to even assume that, either your totally ignorant of history or your a bigot.
I mean seriously, have you heard of the middle ages?
The inherent bigotry in that question is astounding.

He's probably ill informed. Until a few decades ago, scholarship was dominated by Christianity, and it was standard practice to depict the world before Christianity as a chaotic hellhole of immorality that was miraculously saved when Christianity took over - it still was the case a decade ago in my high school (98-99), my religion class focused a lot on how Christians were brutally persecuted by the evil immoral Pagans, and then Constantine came and everyone lived happily ever after :rolleyes:. It's very sad that in this day and age people are still misinformed about history.

[Yugo45]

The "civilization as we know it today" did start at a time when Christianity was big, but Christianity has nothing to do with it.

For example, during the Middle Ages, the society in muslim parts of the world was a lot more civilised then the society in christian parts of the world. When Christian had the biggest influence in Europe, we all knew what that looked like. Barbaric, like you said.

[hatzel]

Fuck no. We literally had to shove religion aside and bring in secularism just to civilize some of these religious barbarians. Even that hasn't worked for some of them. Not to mention, science didn't get to where its at without a fight against the savages and even now they're still trying to interfere with the teaching of evolution and other sciences. And if you're implying Christians didn't have barbaric attitudes regarding women you have a lot of learning to do.

Ahaha it's funny because you clearly have literally no idea what 'civilisation' even means. Here's a clue: being 'civilised' doesn't mean having good manners and wearing a tuxedo and a monocle and saying 'hooow do you dooo?' and knowing proper dining etiquette and all that blow. There wasn't exactly anybody (in Europe at least) left to 'civilise' when secularism come in.

Though I can't blame you because the OP is equally ignorant about what 'civilisation' means. Since when did rubbing your dick on some kid's thigh suddenly mean you're no longer living in a civilisation? :confused:

[Zealot]

Ahaha it's funny because you clearly have literally no idea what 'civilisation' even means. Here's a clue: being 'civilised' doesn't mean having good manners and wearing a tuxedo and a monocle and saying 'hooow do you dooo?' and knowing proper dining etiquette and all that blow. There wasn't exactly anybody (in Europe at least) left to 'civilise' when secularism come in.

The hell are you talking about. I never said secularism civilized Christians by making them wear tuxedos and monocles.

[Omsk]

Its actually the other way around,during the Middle Ages (Christianity at its peak) people forgot how to read and write,culture was forgotten,the church destroyed free thinking and kept the people with an iron fist,(and lets not forget the crusades,sectarian wars,and the inquisition) and than the Renaissance happened,the fight against the "culture" of the Church and its influence,a resurgence of learning based on classical sources,return to the culture of ancient Greece and Rome.
So if anything was more harmfull to people in Europe during the Middle Ages than religion,it was the Black Plague.

[Thirsty Crow]

It's quite funny to see how loads of people here have no clue as to the use of the term (and aping all sorts of colonialist discourses on "barbarism/civilization")

[Rooster]

This is actually similar to the old view of historical advancement. Basically, it's an idealist concept where the history of humanity is the striving for a monotheistic religion/God and as such, it isn't a materialist conception of history. Was there civilisation before Christianity? Of course, just look at ancient Egypt, Greece, Babylonia, China and so on. Did they have disagreeable parts of their society? You bet, and so did Christian society. So you can't just cleave the world like that, based on slavery, torture or how brutal life was. Incidentally, it's also strange to read some posts here saying that the dark ages were caused by Christianity instead of a long economic collapse of Roman society.

[Tjis]

Civilization as we know it ('we' being Europeans and north Americans) started in the 19th century. Before this time, the majority lived outside the cities, living an agrarian life, and doing small-scale manufacturing using their own tools. Afterwards, most people lived in cities and sold their labor-power, instead of products.
This change in our civilization, like the changes that preceded it, was not caused by a change in ideas, philosophy or religion, but by a change in material conditions. Technological improvements and a favorable political climate for the bourgeoisie, combined with structural overpopulation of the countryside made this course of history a logical outcome.

As for Christianity, rather than a cause for change, it was an effect. With the decline of the Roman empire, faith in its traditional institutions declined as well, allowing room for unsanctioned religious movements, something that would have been impossible while the empire was strong. The adoption of christianity by the state happened at a time when a significant part of the Romans had already converted. These Christians defied Roman authority, threatening the stability of the empire even further. The adoption of Christianity as the state religion was a logical last attempt at keeping the empire together.

As for civilization, that stuff started with the discovery of agriculture, which allowed the formation of a class of people that did not have to engage in food gathering, thus allowing for a priestly class to develop such things as a writing system, and enabling other kinds of scientific and artistic discoveries.

In all cases, changes in material conditions precede changes in ideas, not the other way around.

[Rafiq]

Christianity had to morph itself to the conditions estabilished over time. It didn't start anything, it adapted.

[Zav]

It really depends how one defines 'civilization'. One could say civilization is any group of people that interact with each other, or that civilization began with cities, or that civilization began with writing 8000 years ago, or any number of things. Note that the word has very positive connotations, and it is always contrasted directly or implicitly with 'primitive', 'savage', 'heathen' or 'barbarian'. To early Christians in the Roman Empire, anyone who lived outside the city (in the heath) and practiced old religions was 'heathen'. To American Colonialists, the native tribes were 'savages'. It is interesting to note the association those words have with violence real or imaginary. The Church burned and tortured people while calling simple Nordic farmers 'barbarians'. Who was the more violent?

The concept of 'civilization' really means 'us and what we like' and everyone else becomes lumped into 'them', making the term pretty much useless, but very interesting from an anthropological standpoint. It really highlights cultural values.

[tfb]

A sad painting:


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cd/Tommaso.Laureti.Triumph.of.Christianity.jpg

[Ocean Seal]

Pederasty was common in Greek/roman cultures, people were used as slaves in Egypt, India and china had barbaric laws regardng women, and so on.

So my question is, did civilization as we know it start with Christianity?
No, no it didn't. Civilization started with agriculture. Civilizations have done their fair share of fucked up things, before and after Christianity.

[Franz Fanonipants]

no

[Franz Fanonipants]

Its actually the other way around,during the Middle Ages (Christianity at its peak) people forgot how to read and write,culture was forgotten,the church destroyed free thinking and kept the people with an iron fist,(and lets not forget the crusades,sectarian wars,and the inquisition) and than the Renaissance happened,the fight against the "culture" of the Church and its influence,a resurgence of learning based on classical sources,return to the culture of ancient Greece and Rome.
So if anything was more harmfull to people in Europe during the Middle Ages than religion,it was the Black Plague.

this is also a fucking lie. way to swallow every ridiculous liberal lie about the past. dumbass.

[Omsk]

this is also a fucking lie. way to swallow every ridiculous liberal lie about the past. dumbass.

Can you write more than petty one-liner accusations and worthless spam?

What is wrong with me saying that religion had a negative influence on the people of the Middle Ages?

[Zostrianos]

Incidentally, it's also strange to read some posts here saying that the dark ages were caused by Christianity instead of a long economic collapse of Roman society.


this is also a fucking lie. way to swallow every ridiculous liberal lie about the past. dumbass.


Christianity was indeed one of the main factors that brought about the Dark Ages. With the outlawing of non Christian religions, philosophical schools and institutions of learning were closed by the authorities, classical philosophy and innovations became blacklisted because of their Pagan origins, and literacy was forbidden to the average citizen and reserved for nobles, monks and the clergy. Pope Gregory 1 (540-604 AD) was furious after hearing that laymen in France were being taught to read, and sent an angry letter to a French bishop ordering him to stop the wicked teaching of grammar to the common folk. Him (and many prominent Church fathers in this period) actively encouraged ignorance:

"A voluminous writer, Gregory was nevertheless an enemy to much education, of which he often expressed his distrust: 'The wise should be advised to cease from their knowledge, to be wisely ignorant, wisely untaught'" (Christianity and Paganism in the 4th to 8th centuries, 97).

Augustine had similar views:

To spend time on such points would not prove to be to the edification of the Church...Put then a limit to your thought, so that your curiosity in investigating the incomprehensible may not incur the reproaches of Job...
At all events let us prefer the simplicity of faith to the demonstrations of reason....
(http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/32011.htm (http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/32011.htm))

And Chrysostom as well:

For that which philosophers were not able by means of reasoning to accomplish, this, what seemed to be foolishness did excellently well...What great labors did Plato endure, and his followers, discoursing to us about a line, and an angle, and a point, and about numbers even and odd, and equal unto one another and unequal, and such-like spiderwebs; (for indeed those webs are not more useless to man's life than were these subjects, and without doing good to any one great or small by their means, so he made an end of his life.... And even as he came he went away, having spoken nothing with certainty, nor persuaded any hearer. But the Cross wrought persuasion by means of unlearned men; yea it persuaded even the whole world: and not about common things, but in discourse of God, and the godliness which is according to truth, and the evangelical way of life, and the judgment of the things to come...And of all men it made philosophers: the very rustics, the utterly unlearned. (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/220104.htm (http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/220104.htm))

So yes, Christian hegemony was one of the main causes of the Dark Ages. It's not a "liberal lie" it's a fact.

[Rooster]

You've just totally ignored class content and just said that Christianity itself (which is stupid because Christianity isn't one monolithic thing) was the main reason for the Dark Ages instead of the actual conditions of the period before, during and after that period.

[bcbm]

its kind of depressing to see leftists bandying terms like 'dark ages' that have been rejected but many current historians as inaccurate and propagating myths about this time period that have been debunked. the church had a lot of power in the early and late middle ages but the term 'dark ages' is false, scholarship continued throughout this period often with little church oversight, rationality was a firm point of much of this scholarship and it really wasn't the ignorant hell most people make it out to be. the decline in certain areas is tied to the fall of the western roman empire, but things kept on in the byzantine empire and in the west there was still education, learning, study, etc that did not reject all earlier advances.

basically y'all need to get out of the victorian era

[Zostrianos]

You've just totally ignored class content and just said that Christianity itself (which is stupid because Christianity isn't one monolithic thing) was the main reason for the Dark Ages instead of the actual conditions of the period before, during and after that period.

That's not what I said. I'll requote my post:


Christianity was indeed one of the main factors that brought about the Dark Ages.....So yes, Christian hegemony was one of the main causes of the Dark Ages. It's not a "liberal lie" it's a fact.

There were other factors, with imperial crises, the barbarian invasions, etc., but the imposition of Christianity as the sole legal religion was one of those factors

[Franz Fanonipants]

Can you write more than petty one-liner accusations and worthless spam?

motherfucker what you spent whatever amount of effort writing about "THE DARK AGES" is worth less than me writing "lol no"

[Franz Fanonipants]

if you are a marxist, and you are looking at history, you are WORTHLESS if you think an idea or a set of ideas preached by anyone "retards progress" or whatever stupid shit you want to believe is teleologically true.

if you aren't a fucking historian, or up on current historical scholarship, shut the fuck up about it. you don't see me posting to fucking engineering forums about how much i think circuit boards are the stupidest shit. you sound equally ignorant.

[Franz Fanonipants]

So yes, Christian hegemony was one of the main causes of the Dark Ages. It's not a "liberal lie" it's a fact.

lol "facts"

you mental deficient i'm a historian. i understand source selection and criticism.

i DARE you to go to Aquinas, a dialectical thinker, and try to argue the same shit. in fact, i dare you to fully tell me HOW an entire intellectual tradition squelched "intellectualism" and created a "dark age."

plus, fool, i want you to tell me WHEN exactly you think this "dark age" persisted from, to, and how it ended.

then, i want you to tell me about renaissance humanism and its "liberating" effect.

e: "proving" shit in history is way harder than selecting w/clear source bias a couple of things that make your point for you.

[Zostrianos]

lol "facts"
you mental deficient i'm a historian. i understand source selection and criticism.


You're a historian? :laugh:



i DARE you to go to Aquinas, a dialectical thinker, and try to argue the same shit. in fact, i dare you to fully tell me HOW an entire intellectual tradition squelched "intellectualism" and created a "dark age."


You pretty much ignored the references I posted about how the Church repressed other movements, just so you can hold on to your belief. Regardless of what I post, I know youll just dismiss it as bullshit, but since I know a little bit about late Antique history and have evidence to prove my points, just this once I'll address you points just for fun.



plus, fool, i want you to tell me WHEN exactly you think this "dark age" persisted from, to, and how it ended.


It began around the time Justinian closed the Platonic academy in 529 (because Pagan philosophy has no place in the Holy Christian empire), and first began to disintegrate during the medieval renaissance of the 12 century, when lost Pagan works found their way back to Europe. The philosophers of the academy emigrated to Harran and other places in the Middle East, where they were free to continue their studies; even after the Islamic conquest, they were allowed to continue (Islam at this time was more tolerant than Christianity).



then, i want you to tell me about renaissance humanism and its "liberating" effect.

Before the Renaissance you weren't permitted to create a work of art that wasn't biblical or Christian. After the Renaissance, this rule was relaxed, and artistic freedom blossomed.

[Franz Fanonipants]

It began around the time Justinian closed the Platonic academy in 529 (because Pagan philosophy has no place in the Holy Christian empire), and first began to disintegrate during the medieval renaissance of the 12 century, when lost Pagan works found their way back to Europe. The philosophers of the academy emigrated to Harran and other places in the Middle East, where they were free to continue their studies; even after the Islamic conquest, they were allowed to continue (Islam at this time was more tolerant than Christianity)..

still more rad source bias.

you're ignoring the carolingian renaissance, the development of scholasticism, and etc.

do me a favor, if you "know a little bit about late antiquity" stay in late fucking antiquity and shut up.

and yeah i'm a historian. you think that's funny?

e: i assume you're basically an internet autodidact right? or do you have actual training in source criticism/source argumentation?
ee: lol basically bro you just said "Well shit got bad for a THOUSAND YEARS because evil christians!"

[Zostrianos]

Right, the same Carolingians who led a campaign of iconoclasm in the name of Christianity :rolleyes:.

[Franz Fanonipants]

Right, the same Carolingians who led a campaign of iconoclasm in the name of Christianity :rolleyes:.

Because destroying idols = UNEQUIVOCAL OPPRESSION FROM IDEAS!

bro you are basically a liberal. i mean you're a luxemborgist so it's p. close to begin with, but i would go ahead and stop trying to act like you actually know what you're saying.

e: basically you are so stupid and v. likely know anything about late antiquity from Larry Gonick and playing Civilization that you basically just said "sure the carolingians encouraged the establishment of more or less an internationalist, public school system but they were really mean about idols so DARK AGES"

[Zostrianos]

You're ignoring the destruction of non Christian literature (book burnings, which were not unique to Christendom, but interestingly enough became much more frequent when Christians took power. Gee, I wonder why?), and the preference of Christian works over others; how Christian scribes regularly sponged out Pagan works to make way for Christian texts (see Macmullen, Christianity & Paganism, chapter 1)

[Franz Fanonipants]

haha you think that's unique to/characteristic of the Dark Ages?

[Ocean Seal]

What is wrong with me saying that religion had a negative influence on the people of the Middle Ages?
There is nothing wrong with this and it is not untrue that Christianity had a negative influence. What is untrue is that Christianity under-developed Europe during the dark ages. The "dark ages" improved Europe significantly from Roman society. Its a common liberal lie that Europe went downhill during the dark ages, because in contemporary capitalist society we associate Empire with prosperity. The truth is the Roman Empire was far poorer than its Chinese or Indian counter-parts. It accounted for 15-20% of the world's population and only 4% of the GDP. The Indian Empire (I forget the dynasty) had a similar population and about 25% of the world's GDP. Liberals often try to paint those who took down the empire as terrible barbarians, but the truth is that what they did was rather progressive. Ironically today's reactionaries are afraid of progressive about 1600 years ago.

[Zostrianos]

Not at all, but the enforcement of Christian belief was a factor that weighed in heavily during this period, and without which much more would have survived.

[bcbm]

You pretty much ignored the references I posted about how the Church repressed other movements, just so you can hold on to your belief.

popular repression of dissident movements has always existed but it doesn't mean no dissident movements existed, you also ignore that the church did not effectively suppress everything and it was often church scholars and monks maintaining scientific inquiries during the early middle ages.

i also think its problematic to pin the decline of widespread education specifically to christianity rather than the numerous other factors going on at the time, the decline of urbanization for example


Before the Renaissance you weren't permitted to create a work of art that wasn't biblical or Christian.

this is just false, even churches produced secular art during the early middle ages

[Franz Fanonipants]

Not at all, but the enforcement of Christian belief was a factor that weighed in heavily during this period, and without which much more would have survived.

you're a classicist bro, you think it's a tragedy that "antique knowledge" is destroyed because you come from a ridiculous, patriarchal, racist edge of the academe.

that owns. you should be kept around for amusement.

e: ALL KNOWLEDGE HAS BEEN DESTROYED AND SUPPRESSED. JUST BECAUSE YOUR FAVORITE IMPERIALIST APOLOGIST PIG WRITERS WERE BURNED DOES NOT MAKE A TRAGEDY.

[Zostrianos]

you're a classicist bro, you think it's a tragedy that "antique knowledge" is destroyed because you come from a ridiculous, patriarchal, racist edge of the academe.
that owns. you should be kept around for amusement.
e: ALL KNOWLEDGE HAS BEEN DESTROYED AND SUPPRESSED. JUST BECAUSE YOUR FAVORITE IMPERIALIST APOLOGIST PIG WRITERS WERE BURNED DOES NOT MAKE A TRAGEDY.

Well then, there's nothing more for me to say:rolleyes:

[Misanthrope]

Civilized, a word used to justify the slaughter of Native Americans because they weren't "civilized". A word that is used to justify racist "science" and social darwinism. This is probably a talking point from your Priest or Sunday school teacher.

[bcbm]

oh i forgot to mention the renaissance was also very christian

[Franz Fanonipants]

Civilized, a word used to justify the slaughter of Native Americans because they weren't "civilized". A word that is used to justify racist "science" and social darwinism. This is probably a talking point from your Priest or Sunday school teacher.

but, slaughtering indians was progress. just like the renaissance.

[Misanthrope]

but, slaughtering indians was progress. just like the renaissance.

What is progress?

[Franz Fanonipants]

What is progress?

an object of worship for idiots who say things like "the dark ages happened until the renaissance!"

[DinodudeEpic]

Medieval kingdoms are some of the most idealized things in history...

The medieval kingdoms were still oppressive, and they were even more oppresive due to increased religious persecution and serfdom. (They even still had slavery in the middle ages, and lots of it.)

The Dark Ages was the dark ages though because the Roman Empire fell from power, and it wasn't even worldwide. The Eastern Roman Empire was doing fine, and the Arabs were having a golden age.

So, the Dark Ages are better to be called the 'Western European Dark Ages' because the rest of world was actually doing really well. (The two above examples, African empires such as the Mali, the Maya, India, and of course China.)

So in total, Western Europe was a sucky place compared to Roman times. (While there were still advances in culture, they were way more slower then say Roman times. And, architecture declined. Also, the capital of the 'Holy Roman Empire' is crap compared to Baghdad or any Chinese city. Also, the Late Roman Times were also turbulent.)

[Omsk]

motherfucker what you spent whatever amount of effort writing about "THE DARK AGES" is worth less than me writing "lol no"

I never even used the term "DARK AGES" you scream about.
I never said that the Renaissance was some kind of an ultra positive moment in history - just that during the Renaissance,the people fought the influence of the Church.

And i have went a little to far in my post,saying that the people forgot to read/write,but i think you are over-reacting.

[Franz Fanonipants]

And i have went a little to far in my post,saying that the people forgot to read/write,but i think you are over-reacting.

you overreached about whatever you think you know, its good that you admitted it, but maybe you shouldn't overreach

[Franz Fanonipants]

The Dark Ages was the dark ages though because the Roman Empire fell from power, and it wasn't even worldwide. The Eastern Roman Empire was doing fine, and the Arabs were having a golden age.

lots of sucking up to the Roman Empire by "communists" itt

bros do you all have like lockets w/pictures of fat ass Edward Gibbon or something?

[RGacky3]

Its not love of the Roman Empire to point it out as an example of pre-christian "civilization."

Or to poiny out the historicity of the fall of the Roman Empire causing the Dark Ages.

[Franz Fanonipants]

Its not love of the Roman Empire to point it out as an example of pre-christian "civilization."

Or to poiny out the historicity of the fall of the Roman Empire causing the Dark Ages.

yeah but the Roman Empire never "fell" in the way that these idiots seem to think it did.

e: and none of you seem to remember that the Roman Empire became a Christian civilization in its last 300 or so years of existence. so...
e of e: plus, i doubt op would count the Romans as a "civilization"
e of e of e: you guys using the word "historicity" owns

[RGacky3]

The Roman Empire fell in stages overtime, few empires simply FELL in the way your thinking.

E: The Roman Empire becamse "christian" (which if your applying it to so called christainiing of the roman empire basically robs the term christian of any meaning whatsoever) AFTER it was an empire and AFTER it was a "civilization"

E of E: Well under almost any definition of the word it was (unless your calling civilization christianity, which is redundant).

E of E of E: Ok

BTW, this "christianity" your talking about that entered into the political sphere would fall short of being defined as actually christian by any reading of the new testiment scriptures.

[bcbm]

Its not love of the Roman Empire to point it out as an example of pre-christian "civilization."

Or to poiny out the historicity of the fall of the Roman Empire causing the Dark Ages.

modern history generally rejects the term 'dark ages'

[Franz Fanonipants]

modern history generally rejects the term 'dark ages'

modern history nothing these marxists only ever read E. Gibbon

[Blake's Baby]

Why so keen to defend Christianity, Franz?

[Franz Fanonipants]

Why so keen to defend Christianity, Franz?

i'm not defending christianity, i'm denigrating people who aren't historians acting like they understand history.

p.s. i am a christian but that is neither here nor there in me calling "marxists" who believe in the "dark ages" ignorant. especially if they, as in the case of poimandres, are stupid enough to bemoan the passing of antiquity as the loss of some alleged golden age.

[Franz Fanonipants]

Not at all, but the enforcement of Christian belief was a factor that weighed in heavily during this period, and without which much more would have survived.

like this shit, which is patently unmarxist.

people do not live or die via belief.

[#FF0000]

p.s. i am a christian

what

also to the op and anyone else on this "christianity started civilization" kick should look up this thing called china

[Franz Fanonipants]

what

yeah bro i'm a catholic didn't you know

[#FF0000]

yeah bro i'm a catholic didn't you know












what

[lots of laughs]

I think civilization would be a good idea. But I've yet to see an example of it. (With apologies to that Indian person.)

[RGacky3]

modern history generally rejects the term 'dark ages'

Ok but you get my point.

[tradeunionsupporter]

Yes there was.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Everyone knows Civilization began in 1991.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/ec/Civilizationboxart.jpg

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

like this shit, which is patently unmarxist.

people do not live or die via belief.

Maybe not, but people certainly act on their beliefs, and those actions can have life or death consequences.

[GallowsBird]

Firstly it is true that most Historians do not use the term "Dark Ages" for the period generally called the Early Middle Ages (except in some case for the very early part of the period before written records are common, more on that later). It should also however be noted that the term "Dark Ages" does not refer to the times being bad (no matter what TV tells you) it merely refers to an era in which there are a lack of sources to "illuminate" modern Historians hence "dark" (We can't see the era clearly), in English History the only era that is a "Dark Age" in the traditional sense was between roughly the 400s-700s as this era was a time before we have many written records in English (or Latin) as written records became more common due to Monks being taught to read and write (much like the Ancient Roman clergy, the Pontifex Maximus ("Pope"), the Flamens etc). After that we have numerous works in Latin and somewhat unusually English (in older forms such as Northumbrian, West Saxon, Mercian etcetera) as during the Early Middle Ages most writing was in Latin. This is not to say we don't have writing before the Christian era (we do, mostly in Futhorc Runes) but this was rarer and mostly in use with certain tradesmen and officials to Kings ("Cyningas") and Thanes.

Incidentally there are more eras called "Dark Ages" than the iconic "Barbarians descend upon Europe" era we know and love. In Ancient Greece there was a period that has often been called the "Greek Dark Ages" as in that era writing was scarce.


Though we shouldn't imply that Christianity was the root of all Europe's problems it did add many problems on top of those already existing, for instance whereas "heresy" was very uncommon with most of the Heathen faiths, during the Christian era (especially during the earlier part of the High Middle Ages, not the so-called "Dark Ages") the label was used for many dissenting viewpoints and "crusades" would usually follow (such as that against the Cathars). Suppression of art and literature became common reaching a peak in the ultra-conservative Renaissance (which looked back to Antiquity dismissing years of advancement, had such organisations as the Inquisitions, executions of scientists and artists) contrary to popular (incorrect looking at the historical record) belief. People like Leonardo Da Vinci were by far an exception in that era and not the rule. The breaking away from religious dogma and towards secularism actually started (but was not completed obviously) during the later "Enlightenment" (which many seem to confuse with the Renaissance) rather than the aforementioned Renaissance or High Middle Ages.

Also it should be noted that in the Islamic world scholarship was probably the greatest in the world during the High Middle Ages and likewise in the Dharmic world. The designation of "Middle Ages" etcetera does not universally conform to the same period in all cultures (not even European ones).