You can’t discuss kings without discussing the rich history of Europe with thousands of years of oral and written history long predating the Sumerians and even the ancient Proto Indo-European peoples to which European language and culture is often erroneously attributed.
The dark ages were anything but dark.
Ancient Europe was anything but primitive.
And yet it’s so rarely discussed in the mainstream.
After the fall of the Roman empire primitive religion came to rule Europe. The science the Greeks gave Europe were lost or stagnated, and literacy was almost exclusively the domain of the church. Europe regressed, while the Islamic world preserved the Greek science texts and China thrived (inventing gunpowder and money to start with).
Everything is named by comparison, and we compare that age to the age of enlightenment. I don't care how unpopular it is to say it out loud, it's the literal, provable, and easily verified truth that Europe during that time was an age of intellectual darkness.
After the fall of the Roman empire primitive religion came to rule Europe.
I get that you want to bash Christianity, but... it's not like it was less progressive than worshipping force-of-nature gods with a propensity for rape and petty revenge.
Not at all. The dark ages were dark. Pretending like they weren't because of your religious choices is just intellectually dishonest, regardless of your faith.
Were they dark because religion was in charge? Yes.
Atheists have perpetrated their fair share of horrors (and then some) as well. So have most/many other religions.
Using weak language to avoid having to consider the horrors of the past helps no-one except those who wish to repeat those horrors.
My objection is not to Christianity, it is to revisionists who want to pretend like Christianity didn't already have a go at being in charge or forget the monstrosity of what happened when it was.
AFAIK it's called Middle Ages. "Dark ages" is a nickname, it exists in Portuguese too, at least, and yes it reflects obsolete notions about that moment in history.
It's clear by the number of symbols it's a writing system of sorts (proto-writing). It could definitely be pictograms (probably IMO), but then again, cuneiform, hieroglyphics and Chinese writing all started as pictograms as well.
Comments
You can’t discuss kings without discussing the rich history of Europe with thousands of years of oral and written history long predating the Sumerians and even the ancient Proto Indo-European peoples to which European language and culture is often erroneously attributed.
The dark ages were anything but dark.
Ancient Europe was anything but primitive.
And yet it’s so rarely discussed in the mainstream.
The "dark ages" were also thousands of years after the Sumerians. Even the Greek Dark Age postdates Sumer by a millennium.
So you're not really filling me with confidence about your idea here. Perhaps you can provide some sort of evidence?
Would you mind being a little clearer about what it is you’re saying here?
The period is only called dark age in English for what it’s worth, that should make it pretty obvious it’s not a universal understanding of that era
It deserves to be called that.
After the fall of the Roman empire primitive religion came to rule Europe. The science the Greeks gave Europe were lost or stagnated, and literacy was almost exclusively the domain of the church. Europe regressed, while the Islamic world preserved the Greek science texts and China thrived (inventing gunpowder and money to start with).
Everything is named by comparison, and we compare that age to the age of enlightenment. I don't care how unpopular it is to say it out loud, it's the literal, provable, and easily verified truth that Europe during that time was an age of intellectual darkness.
I get that you want to bash Christianity, but... it's not like it was less progressive than worshipping force-of-nature gods with a propensity for rape and petty revenge.
Not at all. The dark ages were dark. Pretending like they weren't because of your religious choices is just intellectually dishonest, regardless of your faith.
Were they dark because religion was in charge? Yes.
Atheists have perpetrated their fair share of horrors (and then some) as well. So have most/many other religions.
Using weak language to avoid having to consider the horrors of the past helps no-one except those who wish to repeat those horrors.
My objection is not to Christianity, it is to revisionists who want to pretend like Christianity didn't already have a go at being in charge or forget the monstrosity of what happened when it was.
AFAIK it's called Middle Ages. "Dark ages" is a nickname, it exists in Portuguese too, at least, and yes it reflects obsolete notions about that moment in history.
Can you give us a few pointers or links?
Not the OP but there's this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vin%C4%8Da_symbols
Some people also interpret some symbols on mammoth tusks going back 50k years as writing but that's a stretch IMO.
Interpreting Vinca symbols as a full-blown writing system is also widely considered a stretch.
Are you talking alphabet or just writing system?
It's clear by the number of symbols it's a writing system of sorts (proto-writing). It could definitely be pictograms (probably IMO), but then again, cuneiform, hieroglyphics and Chinese writing all started as pictograms as well.