Were the Dark Ages a meme or does the name have some validity?

What the fuck are you on about? It's called the dark ages because after the fall of the empire there wasn't a similar prosperity reached for a few hundred years

It has some validity. Most people just call it Late Antiquity these days though.

>>2917351
The period from the 5th to the 10th century AD was definitely a dark age and a setback when compared to the Roman empire.

Cities abandoned almost completely (Rome went from a pop of 1,000,000 to 20,000), Roman infrastructrures abandoned and left in ruins (aqueducts, sewers, public baths, most roads), trade decreased exponentially and communications over all got worse and say slower, widespread piracy and barbarian hordes all over the place, lower degrees of literacy.

>>2917351
They existed for the urban areas covered by the former Western Roman Empire.

It's a dumb as shit periodization.

After the fall of Rome and before the 10th century, there were the Merovingians, the Carolingians, the Byzantine golden age, the Islamic golden age, the feudal revolution and a lot of other shit.

The heavy plow was also used for the first time, making life easier for peasants.

The people who had a shitty time during most of the early middle ages, were Iberian christians, and northern europeans affected by the Viking invasions.

>>2917420
The feudal revolution was a setback

The Merovigians and Carovigians were way inferior than the Romans

>>2917351
It's the term used to describe between the peak of the Roman Empire (the light of Rome) and the 'enlightenment' era, thus should only be used by Whig and Marxist historians

>>2917376
>your population is kept in place mainly through free bread and crime not being that rampant
>people will glorify you forever for this

>>2917422

A setback for peasants maybe.

But for the Carolingian and Norman nobility it was the birth of the feudal state.

>>2917430
Merovingians still maintained some of the Roman infrastructure and their architecture was good, but Carolingians were definitely a setback

Lots of information loss, abandonment of cities, rise of feudalism.
So yeah.

>>2917440
How so?
Charlemagne seems so much cooler

>>2917420
heavy plow+ 3 field system

that one was way more important

>>2917351
There was a post in another thread devastating the 'dark ages' myth, but I don't remember the thread.

Dark ages are part of the progress narrative. They need some supposed fall bbefore reaching Salvation, aka humanism

>>2917736
>Dark ages are part of the progress narrative.
Yes,except they lost:

Most of the literature

Infrastructure

Educated population

Plumbing

Where exactly is the progress?

>>2918230
You clearly misunderstood or misread my post.

As part of tthe supposed progress story of the world, a 'dark age' is the perfect plot device.

And give sources about losing those things.

>most of the literature

Temporarily lost due to neglect, and were free to visit Greece and read there

>infrastructure
They were busy solving bigger problems, Arabs and Vikings

>educated population
The masses were and are never educated

>Plumbing
The Frankish palace had giant swimming pools

>>2917351
that pic isn't portraying the dark ages, it's portraying the black death which occurred in the late middle ages.

>>2918309
>Temporarily lost
You do realize most of classical writings actually vanished?

Thats why no-one knows etruscan or about Caligulas early rule.

>The masses were and are never educated
There was widespread social mobility, and education for the wealthy and newly rich

>The Frankish palace had giant swimming pools
The merovigians were an exception to the rest of the former roman empire

>>2918309
the romans had to deal with barbarian hordes and they managed infrastructure

>>2917351
Dark ages (which is more of a prefix) are just called so due to a lack of historical records, and it eventually developed into a pejorative.

>>2918309
schools were widespread in the Roman empire

>>2918488
>Lack of historical records.
>Jordanes
>Frankish historians
>Byzantine historians.

>>2917429
>They managed to keep a city of 1,000,000 people going, while maintaining monumental architecture, huge festivals, and other heights of human achievement.
>They had the infrastructure to support this staggeringly large population in the 1st century AD
>A city with a population this large did not exist again until the beginning of the 20th century (Paris and London)

I hope the Romans are glorified for this for all eternity.