>tfw there's so little information about the dark ages

>>3344390
You have to be 18 to post on this site.

There is tons. The Dark Ages is a psyop.

>>3344424
>>3344545
Naw, op is right, as long as you define the dark ages as between 500-900 in the west.
>my cronicles
If you actually read medieval history you would know how often the chronicles counterdict more reliable sources, such as government clerk records as early as 1050 ad. On major and minor points, so I don't know why you would relay on them much.
Anyways the truth is there wasn't much of interest happening in the west in all likelihood.

File: medieval manuscripts.png (62KB, 1278x953px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 1278x953px

>>3344424
>>3344545
While the term "Dark Age" carries false connotations, there really is a dearth of records.

Isn't it called that by historians because of the lack of primary sources rather than the meme about technology stopped werkin.

>>3345836
look immediately above you ya dingus

>>3345849
That doesn't say what I say it just corroborates it you big gay

File: bane kawaii.jpg (65KB, 500x401px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 500x401px

>>3345855
>big gay
for u

yfw some fedora tipper calls it the Christian Dark Ages and makes out that we'd be in space now if it never happened

>>3345930
that's true though

>>3345957
No serious historian has believed the "Christian Dark Age" meme in about a century.

What we genuinely have very little knowledge of are medieval machines. In one book about technology that I read earlier this year, the author lamented that scarce sources and surviving archeological evidence suggest that medival society must've used lots of different machines that could be quite complex considering the level of technology available at the time, but apparently no one thought to make records of them since they were too ordinary and ubiquitous. Considering how long the medieval period is, that's quite unfortunate.

King Arthur was King Riothamus

Sailing across the ocean from Camuludonum (Camelot) he presided over Brythonic settlement of Brittany and in return helped defend the declining Western Roman Empire against the Visigoths. His reputation as a benevolent ruler was such that in a correspondence with the Bishop of Clermont there was a complaint that Breton warriors freed the slaves of a landowner, presumably one of the last Roman Latifundia who were soon to be totally extinct in the west.

His unpopularity amongst the Romans led to his betrayal when a certain Arvandus gave away his position to the Visigoths. After the battle he fled to Avallon where he later died, possibly of injuries sustained in the battle or in a last stand against the Visigoths using the town's fortifications.

>>3345963
Wrong.

>>3345812
Well, the older something gets, the less likely it is to survive without proper conservation. Carolingian manuscripts would have to be over 1000 years old, before people began seriously trying to conserve Manuscripts.

If I had to acknowledge the Dark age, I'd peg it at 500-750.

>tfw there's so little information about the Greek dark ages
Fixed that for you OP

>>3346226
Unironically the most fascinating period of history

>>3346231
how so?

>>3346074
What a crock of shit.

Riothamus is someone entirely different, the dates don't even match up.

Arthur's powerbase was not in Camuludonum, which was also not the basis for Camelot.

Sidonius Apollonaris' letter is often misinterpreted.

Avallon is a meme.

>>3345812
>there really is a dearth of records.

Really it depends where you go in Europe. Gaul for example had an unbroken urban culture with bishops and monks writing histories and records down the centuries.

Spain had it a fair bit worse, but still had the occasional church council and chronicle come out of it.

Britain, Raetia and Dacia on the other hand were completely fucked, and very little comes out of them for 300 years. Britain's literary evidence from the period is literally Gildas' nonsensical rantings, some letters from St Patrick, some saints lives detailing St Germanus and others wandering about, some early Welsh poems and that's virtually it. The Early Middle Ages in Britain is truly dark.

>>3346233
I'm interested in relatively unknown periods in history in general. Overall, I'm particularly interested in the transition from the Palatial Mycenaean society to the more splintered, proto city-states.

File: 1504724275071.png (344KB, 576x467px) Image search: [Google]

344KB, 576x467px

>>3346249
>that spacing

>>3346233
It's fascinating because civilizations experienced absolutely massive changes during that period and we basically know Jack all about it because the Bronze Age Collapse which precipitated those changes also caused nearly the entire ancient world along with all of Greece to stop writing

File: 1504558492265.png (446KB, 808x805px) Image search: [Google]

446KB, 808x805px

>there are no good narrative histories of the Frankish Kingdom

>>3346267
That's because the Matter of France is infinitely more interesting
>>3346263
The Greeks stopped writing, because Linear B is fucking hard to write in and also read, due to the fact that it has to reduce Greek, which is not a syllabic language, into syllables.
If you can't train the scribes, and don't honestly need them, you won't be able to read.

Literacy only picked up with the Alphabet, which is easily understandable and can be used to fully realize the Greek language.

>>3346211
That's a very fair point.

>>3346249
>Spain had it a fair bit worse
Yeah, portions of the Muslim conquest of Iberia are completely in the dark.

>>3346249
Geoffrey of Monmouth based his legend of Arthur on oral history passed down through the centuries. Gildas's records are contemporary and made with perfect clarity.

>>3346255
That'd be cool.

>>3344545
He meant the Greek Dark Ages.

>>3344390
>Dark ages
>It wasnt dark and people could still see

What's up with that?!

>>3346850
"based on" ≠ "accurate reproduction"