> The other usage of "Dark Ages" is the general view of the poverty, > superstitious ignorance, and stagnation during this period. This > persisted until the rebirth of reason known as the Renaissance. This > opened up a new era of optimism, prosperity, and scientific progress, > all made possible by the philosophies of secular humanism and > scientific method.
Gary, again, what are your sources and list your evidence for this. FYI I have a history degree and specialized in the European Middle Ages. I also don't believe in the Rennaisance (at least the pop definition of the term, i.e. the period between 1500 and 1600). The reasons are too lengthy to go into here, but mostly stem from the evidence that the growth of the scientific method, humanism, learning, etc did not begin after 1500 but much much earlier. Specifically, I'd reccommend you look at the 12th C Rennaisance, and there are a number of good books I can reccommend on the subject. Indeed this was the 2nd such Rennaisance to occur (the first was in the mid-750s or so) so to suggest the MA were the "Dark Ages" are wildly inaccurate on BOTH definitions. Damon, and lets not get into a discussion of the growth in superstition in the post 1500 era... _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
