Dark Age
The coming of a new dark age.
The 5th / 9th centuries and that of the early middle ages, has been described as the ‘Dark Ages’. It is a term that is now glossed over in academic history as being not entirely accurate for it has to be seen as contextually limited and was coined to cover a period when there was an apparently localised lack of cultural recording or social development. This term was particularly subscribed as such in some countries like GB and Europe. The Dark Age was not a global historical descriptive term rather it relied on the authority of those that had the power to a write a historic description of a time based on whatever evidence could be gleaned from incomplete records of a various nature. The applied affect of the proposed dark ages did not pertain to all cultures but is now being used as a balancing format against which notable progress of one culture achieves against another for periods of time, so it is for instance used against the period of the early middle ages as a measure of slow progress comparing Europe with the brilliance of the Byzantium and Arab empires. In this balancing context it may be thought that all cultures eventually must go through a period that might be labelled as a dark age to denote a time of uncertainty, retrenchment, repression or an overriding sense of a lack of progressive betterment. Only the examination of available records measured against the best of the world’s civilisation of a time can indicate the presence and depth of a period that might justify the tag of a dark age.
From common usage and education, most people born in the 20th century within GB would have some acceptance of the term dark ages and may place it in the history of the middle ages and ignore the earlier one; these times though are of course now disputed. The first suggested dark age of GB & Europe was initially taken as a retrenchment from the Roman Empire consequence and Saxon invasions, after which it was assumed that for a while little broad cultural progress was made as a great deal of cultural disharmony was in play. The cause of the later apparent lack of development in the middle ages (dark age) may be to some extent due to a breakdown in organisational structures and little cohesive social order that discouraged progression in all fields of learning due in some degree with the effects of the great famine of 1315-17 as a result of poor weather with pitiable crops unable to sustain the increased populations and the later black death of 1348.
So the dark ages term is a convenient short pictorial ‘word term’ that implies, amongst other things, ignorance and social disorder, cultural breakdown and fragmentation with no great leaps of endeavours. Yet it is a term that only seems to apply with hind sight and may not now in actual fact be considered as a perfect descriptive of the other times when such similar devastations took place but also allowed innovations. There may have been sparks of enlightenment and progress by a few aware individuals yet these individuals may not have been of great presence within the culture of the time to have any noted wide impact. Unfortunately as there was little in the way of wide spread common hand writing or print, contemporaneous recording was not proficient (compared with the information knowledge explosion of today and its extensive replication) so little of the destructive times provides a wealth of accurate records that can show a broad spectrum of civil structures or of the daily lives of people to be able to draw from conclusively, ideas about the intrinsic way of life from those that lived in the periods known as the dark ages.
As is the case in any time, those of a period would not recognise any pejorative descriptive term to themselves, be it peoples of the stone age, dark age, middle age or renaissance period; although they may, had they the opportunity, relate to an alternative descriptive term to describe the times they lived under, it might be one determined by the affects of conflicts and survival strife that made living in peace difficult rather than one of a descriptive term of high expectation. Never the less it does seem that in the periods of known history that there were epochs of some difficulty suffered with conflict, famine and pestilence; more than enough to just persuade people of the time to strive to live for survival and have little time for creative development.
Figuratively, there is no exact time for the periods of history that is given descriptive terms as they are dependant on what source of material one draws from to subscribe to the notion of something like the dark ages etc. This is no different than the period linked to the Renaissance of the 16th/17th century or of the ‘enlightenment’ era of the 18th century; or the ‘industrial age’; it all depends on the emphasis being placed on historical referenced elements that seem to be prevalent of the times. One thing that does seem clear is that when living in a time of change it is difficult to know just what the society will be judged on by future beings to be able to label a period with a tag that become instantly descriptive of the time. However there are some trends that can be picked up on that may offer an illustrative metaphor however inexact for today. This term might be (and is used now) as the technological age – in the early 19th/20th century when technology was used as the driving force in many areas of progress: - economy, mass education in literacy, energy, all fields of science, social and cultural progression, health and sustenance. Equally it could be called the’ computer age’ or the ‘capitalist’s age’ both of which in part have created the illusion of unlimited sustainable growth stemming from technology. Yet there is I think one major difference between the periods of the past like the ‘renaissance enlightenment’ of the 16th /17th century or the dark ages. This difference was in the application and development of philosophy and social movement, whereas the renaissance and enlightened may have produced movement of thought that imbued development drive, the dark ages seemed to carry inferences of not being able to offer any notable progression. This might be compared with the late 20th century leading into the 21st that has produced no such great shifts of reshaping of society but is disseminating degradation of the higher qualities of civil life by ossification of socio structures even though at the same time productive and material development ability has been extensive and available to a considerable greater number of people then ever before. This may be no more that a reflection of the fact the humans have not cognitively progressed much beyond the Neanderthals.
Although not seen at the time, the chain of events that have created links of causations that could be lined up as the precursors to the psychosis of the dark ages, little could be done to avoid the destructive events, even though there was within these periods pockets of development, those development could not be brought into play until there was a receptive need to embrace the social and culturally expediency of common acceptance for them to work.
Even though now the academics may wish to re-write the interpretation of the dark ages as a loose descriptive context it does have a powerful warning, one that is so easily forgotten. People may not know the entering into of a dark age while they are dealing within the moment but there may be certain elements of a social order that indicate a slippage into a less beneficial age that may well turn out to be a new dark age. For a dark age to succeed, possibly two element are required, 1: a breakdown of social order that practically destroys all acceptable lawful modes driven by internal or external pressures or 2: an exercise of excessive controlling power that stupefies social integration; both leading to a diminution of national idealism resulting in micro civil authority be it of ‘legal’ or ‘criminal’ jurisdictions.
It is easy to believe that with all current technical ability of the modern age that no major collapse of any kind that may afflict a country could be possible but it is not just the support structure that could go first, it can be the social ideology that supported the compact that allowed democracy to flourish and all that flows from it. This it would be difficult to track as it would be hidden within the dynamics of cultural attitudes and be of a slow moving nature although some aspect of this are visible now. All of the civil social constructs within in some advanced countries are now under threat of limitations. The response to the difficulties of this time is the slow erosion of the ‘rights’ to have such benefits, the imposition of more public controls (with the abuse of powers original dedicated to the ‘fight against terrorism’) and the transfer of access to the quality of life to those that either control the wealth, law or politics; creating disenfranchised citizenship.
Part of the growing problem is the cost of providing social construct measure such as universal health care, education, disability support, unemployment support and pensions. Also the decline of features that assist spiritual elevation of soul, self or as Freudian psychologist may have it the ego; too Jung’s psychic energy matched by the decreasing ability to provide funding resources for universal social infrastructure improvements or the drive for creative education achievement for its own sake. The lack of manufacturing, science and technical drive as the instigator of high level knowledge and jobs in developed countries, lost to low cost producers etc, against the ability of a county as a whole to pay for it all due to declining revenue. This though excludes the cost of military forces and civil policing which will be maintained and at times of stress be reinforced to protect the deserving hierarchy.
The enhancing developments of the past were generated by the affordability of creative leisure time. It was a time of apparent abundance that bestowed benefits on all civil structures that manifested as a step towards a good society even though little of it was planned; it matured via the interplay of social pressures and the power shifts of political interaction with the strength of acquired resources. Now the west is increasing concerned with the variety of threats that will impact their security of dominance and this will cause increasing restriction on what its saps will be allowed to do. Inevitably fractures will occur as tensions internally become corrosive against the legitimacy of corrupted democracy. Security will be become a new poison philosophy behind which the powers are likely to hide and in some way this could fore fill one element of the precursor to a dark age.
But would a new dark age be possible? It may already be developing and in one particular way, since it can be quite obvious if one thinks of a lack of energy resources. A major contributor to a new dark age will be the lack of affordable energy, and although a great deal of discursive action is under way to bolster the economy of the world from the current credit asset value crisis that has near exterminate elements of the banking sectors which has also poisoned the working economy, it is the ability to fund the future requirements of energy that will be the greatest test. It is simple to say, no energy and no lights and in more ways than one, a new dark age.
Yet leaving aside the above or an occurrence of ele proportions stemming from an environment cataclysm, despite the prognosis of a new dark age it is certain that there will be pockets of development that will continue and these will, it is hoped, be the bedrock for a new future enlightenment. An unknown factor is from where such enlightenment will come from and it may not be driven by the halcyon days controlled by the west.
© Renot 2009
805091433
The 5th / 9th centuries and that of the early middle ages, has been described as the ‘Dark Ages’. It is a term that is now glossed over in academic history as being not entirely accurate for it has to be seen as contextually limited and was coined to cover a period when there was an apparently localised lack of cultural recording or social development. This term was particularly subscribed as such in some countries like GB and Europe. The Dark Age was not a global historical descriptive term rather it relied on the authority of those that had the power to a write a historic description of a time based on whatever evidence could be gleaned from incomplete records of a various nature. The applied affect of the proposed dark ages did not pertain to all cultures but is now being used as a balancing format against which notable progress of one culture achieves against another for periods of time, so it is for instance used against the period of the early middle ages as a measure of slow progress comparing Europe with the brilliance of the Byzantium and Arab empires. In this balancing context it may be thought that all cultures eventually must go through a period that might be labelled as a dark age to denote a time of uncertainty, retrenchment, repression or an overriding sense of a lack of progressive betterment. Only the examination of available records measured against the best of the world’s civilisation of a time can indicate the presence and depth of a period that might justify the tag of a dark age.
From common usage and education, most people born in the 20th century within GB would have some acceptance of the term dark ages and may place it in the history of the middle ages and ignore the earlier one; these times though are of course now disputed. The first suggested dark age of GB & Europe was initially taken as a retrenchment from the Roman Empire consequence and Saxon invasions, after which it was assumed that for a while little broad cultural progress was made as a great deal of cultural disharmony was in play. The cause of the later apparent lack of development in the middle ages (dark age) may be to some extent due to a breakdown in organisational structures and little cohesive social order that discouraged progression in all fields of learning due in some degree with the effects of the great famine of 1315-17 as a result of poor weather with pitiable crops unable to sustain the increased populations and the later black death of 1348.
So the dark ages term is a convenient short pictorial ‘word term’ that implies, amongst other things, ignorance and social disorder, cultural breakdown and fragmentation with no great leaps of endeavours. Yet it is a term that only seems to apply with hind sight and may not now in actual fact be considered as a perfect descriptive of the other times when such similar devastations took place but also allowed innovations. There may have been sparks of enlightenment and progress by a few aware individuals yet these individuals may not have been of great presence within the culture of the time to have any noted wide impact. Unfortunately as there was little in the way of wide spread common hand writing or print, contemporaneous recording was not proficient (compared with the information knowledge explosion of today and its extensive replication) so little of the destructive times provides a wealth of accurate records that can show a broad spectrum of civil structures or of the daily lives of people to be able to draw from conclusively, ideas about the intrinsic way of life from those that lived in the periods known as the dark ages.
As is the case in any time, those of a period would not recognise any pejorative descriptive term to themselves, be it peoples of the stone age, dark age, middle age or renaissance period; although they may, had they the opportunity, relate to an alternative descriptive term to describe the times they lived under, it might be one determined by the affects of conflicts and survival strife that made living in peace difficult rather than one of a descriptive term of high expectation. Never the less it does seem that in the periods of known history that there were epochs of some difficulty suffered with conflict, famine and pestilence; more than enough to just persuade people of the time to strive to live for survival and have little time for creative development.
Figuratively, there is no exact time for the periods of history that is given descriptive terms as they are dependant on what source of material one draws from to subscribe to the notion of something like the dark ages etc. This is no different than the period linked to the Renaissance of the 16th/17th century or of the ‘enlightenment’ era of the 18th century; or the ‘industrial age’; it all depends on the emphasis being placed on historical referenced elements that seem to be prevalent of the times. One thing that does seem clear is that when living in a time of change it is difficult to know just what the society will be judged on by future beings to be able to label a period with a tag that become instantly descriptive of the time. However there are some trends that can be picked up on that may offer an illustrative metaphor however inexact for today. This term might be (and is used now) as the technological age – in the early 19th/20th century when technology was used as the driving force in many areas of progress: - economy, mass education in literacy, energy, all fields of science, social and cultural progression, health and sustenance. Equally it could be called the’ computer age’ or the ‘capitalist’s age’ both of which in part have created the illusion of unlimited sustainable growth stemming from technology. Yet there is I think one major difference between the periods of the past like the ‘renaissance enlightenment’ of the 16th /17th century or the dark ages. This difference was in the application and development of philosophy and social movement, whereas the renaissance and enlightened may have produced movement of thought that imbued development drive, the dark ages seemed to carry inferences of not being able to offer any notable progression. This might be compared with the late 20th century leading into the 21st that has produced no such great shifts of reshaping of society but is disseminating degradation of the higher qualities of civil life by ossification of socio structures even though at the same time productive and material development ability has been extensive and available to a considerable greater number of people then ever before. This may be no more that a reflection of the fact the humans have not cognitively progressed much beyond the Neanderthals.
Although not seen at the time, the chain of events that have created links of causations that could be lined up as the precursors to the psychosis of the dark ages, little could be done to avoid the destructive events, even though there was within these periods pockets of development, those development could not be brought into play until there was a receptive need to embrace the social and culturally expediency of common acceptance for them to work.
Even though now the academics may wish to re-write the interpretation of the dark ages as a loose descriptive context it does have a powerful warning, one that is so easily forgotten. People may not know the entering into of a dark age while they are dealing within the moment but there may be certain elements of a social order that indicate a slippage into a less beneficial age that may well turn out to be a new dark age. For a dark age to succeed, possibly two element are required, 1: a breakdown of social order that practically destroys all acceptable lawful modes driven by internal or external pressures or 2: an exercise of excessive controlling power that stupefies social integration; both leading to a diminution of national idealism resulting in micro civil authority be it of ‘legal’ or ‘criminal’ jurisdictions.
It is easy to believe that with all current technical ability of the modern age that no major collapse of any kind that may afflict a country could be possible but it is not just the support structure that could go first, it can be the social ideology that supported the compact that allowed democracy to flourish and all that flows from it. This it would be difficult to track as it would be hidden within the dynamics of cultural attitudes and be of a slow moving nature although some aspect of this are visible now. All of the civil social constructs within in some advanced countries are now under threat of limitations. The response to the difficulties of this time is the slow erosion of the ‘rights’ to have such benefits, the imposition of more public controls (with the abuse of powers original dedicated to the ‘fight against terrorism’) and the transfer of access to the quality of life to those that either control the wealth, law or politics; creating disenfranchised citizenship.
Part of the growing problem is the cost of providing social construct measure such as universal health care, education, disability support, unemployment support and pensions. Also the decline of features that assist spiritual elevation of soul, self or as Freudian psychologist may have it the ego; too Jung’s psychic energy matched by the decreasing ability to provide funding resources for universal social infrastructure improvements or the drive for creative education achievement for its own sake. The lack of manufacturing, science and technical drive as the instigator of high level knowledge and jobs in developed countries, lost to low cost producers etc, against the ability of a county as a whole to pay for it all due to declining revenue. This though excludes the cost of military forces and civil policing which will be maintained and at times of stress be reinforced to protect the deserving hierarchy.
The enhancing developments of the past were generated by the affordability of creative leisure time. It was a time of apparent abundance that bestowed benefits on all civil structures that manifested as a step towards a good society even though little of it was planned; it matured via the interplay of social pressures and the power shifts of political interaction with the strength of acquired resources. Now the west is increasing concerned with the variety of threats that will impact their security of dominance and this will cause increasing restriction on what its saps will be allowed to do. Inevitably fractures will occur as tensions internally become corrosive against the legitimacy of corrupted democracy. Security will be become a new poison philosophy behind which the powers are likely to hide and in some way this could fore fill one element of the precursor to a dark age.
But would a new dark age be possible? It may already be developing and in one particular way, since it can be quite obvious if one thinks of a lack of energy resources. A major contributor to a new dark age will be the lack of affordable energy, and although a great deal of discursive action is under way to bolster the economy of the world from the current credit asset value crisis that has near exterminate elements of the banking sectors which has also poisoned the working economy, it is the ability to fund the future requirements of energy that will be the greatest test. It is simple to say, no energy and no lights and in more ways than one, a new dark age.
Yet leaving aside the above or an occurrence of ele proportions stemming from an environment cataclysm, despite the prognosis of a new dark age it is certain that there will be pockets of development that will continue and these will, it is hoped, be the bedrock for a new future enlightenment. An unknown factor is from where such enlightenment will come from and it may not be driven by the halcyon days controlled by the west.
© Renot 2009
805091433
posted by Renot at 7:06 am
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home