A not-especially-plausible defence of the 'Dark Ages' for your reading pleasure :)https://twitter.com/Pseudo_Isidore/status/737551724697681921 …
-
-
Suggests useful if *somehow* ignore pejorative connotations(!!) & use to mean ‘lost centuries’ due to difficulty of knowing what happened...
-
But even if could strip of such connotations, not convinced that these are ‘lost centuries’ & so historically unrecoverable that=Dark Age...
-
Ofc, I may be biased as I wrote a PhD+book arguing that not wholly 'lost'/Dark in eastern England (http://www.caitlingreen.org/p/britons-and-anglo-saxons-lincolnshire.html …), but still..! ;)
-
For what it's worth, some old musings on 5-6thC history & terminology in the Lincoln region: http://www.caitlingreen.org/2015/01/lincolnshire-anglo-saxon-or-sub-roman.html …pic.twitter.com/LQleBWNQbL
-
Just in case anyone wants to claim Britain is uniquely 'Dark'+so deserves 'Dark Age', 2 modern writers on Gaul/Italypic.twitter.com/Bioj0W2I5u
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
@shlin28 For all the obvious reasons, just don't use the term Dark Ages -
Absolutely :-/ I really can't see why people keep lining up to defend it :(
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
If we're not happy with being "potentially misleading", maybe shouldn't be giving short names to entire periods of history?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It's a strange argument that one term is better than all the others because it's more BROADLY meaningless
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.