When the Empire faded away in the 4-7th century, contemporary archaelogy now thinks that people's life actually improved.
That shouldn't surprising, should it? I haven't studied history much at all, but I would have assumed that there would be a significant bump in quality of life.
In the recent past, the period between the Roman Empire and the Renaissance was called and considered the Dark Ages. The common assumption was that it wasn't a great time.
I don't think the negative concept of "the Dark Ages" has has been considered valid for many decades, even in basic history classes. The term is still used, of course, but anyone with a basic history education should know that it only implies a relative lack of historical record (which is also decreasingly the case), rather than a period of intellectual darkness or decrease in quality of life.
Comments
That shouldn't surprising, should it? I haven't studied history much at all, but I would have assumed that there would be a significant bump in quality of life.
In the recent past, the period between the Roman Empire and the Renaissance was called and considered the Dark Ages. The common assumption was that it wasn't a great time.
I don't think the negative concept of "the Dark Ages" has has been considered valid for many decades, even in basic history classes. The term is still used, of course, but anyone with a basic history education should know that it only implies a relative lack of historical record (which is also decreasingly the case), rather than a period of intellectual darkness or decrease in quality of life.