I know the so-called Dark Ages have gotten a bad rap for much of history, but this revisionist rehabilitation of the age isn't much better.
But we were talking about the Middle Ages, not the Dark Ages. When exactly are you thinking of?
I know the so-called Dark Ages have gotten a bad rap for much of history, but this revisionist rehabilitation of the age isn't much better.
But we were talking about the Middle Ages, not the Dark Ages. When exactly are you thinking of?
A bit more vague, but yeah it's mostly the same thing.Is it just me, or is this thread almost exactly the same as the blunder thread?
Then it's only a matter of time before an argument over exactly which screw-up is worse breaks out. Not to mention the inevitable classification of things as screw-ups that aren't.A bit more vague, but yeah it's mostly the same thing.
Already happened.Then it's only a matter of time before an argument over exactly which screw-up is worse breaks out. Not to mention the inevitable classification of things as screw-ups that aren't.
I was referring to multiple-page arguments about WWI.Already happened.![]()
Whereas, the Dark Ages is a debunked concept. (though from the wiki it appears it's still in use and limited to regions and times where we have very few records, like Britain and Dacia just after the decline of Roman control). Various parts of Europe actually managed to survive and prosper for most of the following thousand years. For instance, Hagia Sofia, built during the depths of the "Dark Ages" blows the previous Roman architecture out of the water...
The Dark Ages is not a debunked concept, its a re-examined and subsequently shortened one. Society in most relevant respects did collapse. It took forever for them to recover previous levels of literacy, urbanization, commerce, wealth, trade, agricultural output, travel, engineering, technological and cultural output.
The Zimmermann Telegram has gotta be up there amongst the worst.
World War I: no truly innocent parties save the millions of men who destroyed themselves for the welfare of nationalists, aristocrats, and war-funders. I don't know if anything good came of it except for its serving as an example of what nationalism and unquestioning allegiance can do.
That's only positive if you're not Russian.While the war in itself was definitely not good, it did have the positive effect of allowing small countries like mine to become independent.