 |
|
Marcus Agrippa
|
|
That's an interesting point. "Classical" refers to Greek and Roman. The Classical you're thinking of refers to the "Classical Revival" during the Renaissance, when Greco-Roman architecture, philosophy, etc were reintroduced to Western Europe.
In some ways, the Middle Ages in Europe were actually a step down from the Roman Classical era, in terms of political unity, science, governmental organization, road building, etc. It would be interesting to go from classical straight to the Industrial Revolution! lol
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sean
|
|
Auckland, New Zealand.
Jan 2001
time: 05:15
|
|
Yes, a very accurate description Marcus. Though I'd correct you in one point, the classical revival WAS the Renaissance, insofar as it (the Renaissance) was caused by it. Thats is, classical thought (espm Aristotle) was brought make to Europe by thinkers such as Aquinas. You "step down" comment is absolutely true!! The medievil period was a reggression of human advancement.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Stryfe
|
|
Seattle, WA USA
Jan 1970
time: 05:15
|
|
In some sense the medieval period might be understood as a "step down" from the Classical period. But what it really ought to be understood as is a rebeginning; the height of Rome and Greece were the limits of those civilizations. The Dark Ages were the beginning of a different civilization (that of the Germanic barbarians who overthrew Rome). The Romantic nations are those that retain the most of the Classical culture; England, Germany, the Dutch, etc were primarily Germanic. Not surprisingly, the Renaissance began in the Romantic lands, but later it was the northern Europeans who experienced their golden ages.
If you understand the Dark Ages as the beginning of a NEW civilization, rather than an inexplicable decay, then you'll better appreciate it for what it was, and I also think you'll agree it produced something better than the Classical world, with its hero worship and brutality, that is, us--because we're the height of the civilization that began then (or perhaps in the beginning of the decline). The central notion of the middle ages was Christianity, and that religion has at its heart a notion that became developed during that period and under which we live--the value of the individual, since each individual's salvation had to be worked out individually; each individual was a recipient of divine grace, too, regardless of class or sex or nation. Our own recognition of the universal rights of human beings has its root in that principle, even divorced as it is now from religious values. Greece and Rome had to build themselves through barbarity to achieve their heights, and the middle ages were the period in which the new Civilization did that. And I don't think that many of us would prefer to live in the classical world than the current one...
Last edited by Stryfe on 17-10-2001 at 08:20
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Maccabee2
|
|
Excellent clarification, Stryfe.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mars
|
 |
Maryland, USA
Sep 2001
time: 00:15
|
|
I would like to get ride of some misconceptions of the middle ages. Although if you mean thr middle ages were a reggresion of abstract curiosity and reading of books, thereby affecting certain sciences and medicine then you would be right. But on the other hand there was little overall retrogression during the middle ages, in fact "man" made some great discovers during this period. For instance, the trebuchet, armor, barding, the stirrup , the three field system, Fortifactions, catedrals, engineering, horse collar, , feudilism, longbow, crossbow, just to name european advances, who were the civs in "retrogression", where as China was experincing its golden age and other empires like the muslims where advancing as well, the zero was created during this period in india.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Stryfe
|
|
Seattle, WA USA
Jan 1970
time: 05:15
|
|
Thinking along those lines, it might be interesting to be able to choose to start a game at AD 300 or something along those lines--to start out as perhaps a barbarian group that had to manage to establish itself in some neighboring tribe before being wiped out, and see if victory is possible under those conditions...which is much more realistic and difficult. Perhaps that ought to be the first thing I do with the civ editor: create a scenario where you have to play as the Goths and Vandals and other barbarian tribes and manage to overthrow Rome or large portions of it somehow to go forward...you'd also have to worry about your people just being assimilated into Rome, which would possess much higher culture--but this is just what really happened anyway.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Yoleus
|
|
Ancient (up to 700BC:Egypt, Babilon)
Classical(700BC-400DC:Greece, Rome)
Medieval (400-1300:Bysantium, Arab empire, Holy Roman Empire - the one of Charlemagne)
Renaissance (1400-1600, Italy, Swedish empire (yes there was one and pretty tough), Austian Empire, Spain (Reconquista, Conquistadores) )
Modern (1700-1800:Revolutionary France, Imperial England, Imperial Germany)
Contemporary (1900-2000:US, CCCP, European Union)
I would have liked to see these all...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Yoleus
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mannamagnus
The first time the term middle ages was used it was to refer to the period between the first and second coming of Christ |
Yes, but it does not matter. It just refer to a (western) periodisation
quote:
The division in ages is only valid for the western christian world. Our middle ages where e.g. the golden age for the islamic world. And if you look at the Zulu's or Native Americans there will be hardly anything between stone age and modern times. |
Pretty right, nothing bad in Middle Ages, if not for Europe. Arab world flourished. So what?
Zulus or Native American: ok, let's use their division of history 
We are NOT putting a civ over another, we are just splitting down time in chunks, with a western knife. You could do an equally good job using the Arab's world time divisions, or India's, or China's.
quote:
Renaissance stands for the rebirth of classical values with regards to art and science. |
Right as for the origin ot the "renaissance" word, unprecise for the results: it STARTED so, but it got to a further development.
On the other side, there has been a classical renaissance during Charlemagne, but it focused only on studies of the Classical Masters and did not last.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Yoleus
|
|
410.
476.
I know, but the fall of Rome was something that took a long time to complete... one of the first bad signs was the shift of the imperial capital from Rome to Costantinople (in the 4th century).
In the fifth century the barbarian influence and power were already massive: the last emperor, Romulus Augustulus, was just a pathetic placeholder.
So I usually go with "around 400" as "landmark" date, not with one of the many event dates. Just my personal choice.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DaBods
|
|
Emmaus,Pa U.S.A.
May 1999
time: 05:15
|
|
damnit indiana, i was just gonna point that out :P
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Cre8engr
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Yoleus
1914: something bad happens. |
I prefer to mark the beginning of the "Modern Age" from the start (or end) of World War I. World War I (or The Great War as it was known) saw the destruction of every major imperial power that was created before that time and the rise of new countries to fill the vacuum. True, several empires (like Great Britain) survived that malestrom, but they took such a beating that they released all their colonies just to survive as a country. World War I saw the rise of two "third world countries" to global domination (US and Japan), the creation of new form economics (Communism), and the rise of an ancient empire that was almost dead (China). Between World War I and World War II, the balance of power shifted away from a predominatly European controlled world to a world where the balance of power rests on several continents.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Your.Master
|
|
Port Elgin, Ontario, Canada
Apr 2001
time: 05:15
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mars
I would like to get ride of some misconceptions of the middle ages. Although if you mean thr middle ages were a reggresion of abstract curiosity and reading of books, thereby affecting certain sciences and medicine then you would be right. But on the other hand there was little overall retrogression during the middle ages, in fact "man" made some great discovers during this period. For instance, the trebuchet, armor, barding, the stirrup , the three field system, Fortifactions, catedrals, engineering, horse collar, , feudilism, longbow, crossbow, just to name european advances, who were the civs in "retrogression", where as China was experincing its golden age and other empires like the muslims where advancing as well, the zero was created during this period in india. |
Umm...
most of those European "discoveries" were imported inventions from Asia, specifically china. And feudalism certainly wasn't an advance!!! Feudalism might have worked had the situation in the world been different. The same is true about Communism, but most people aren't turning Red just yet.
About half of the rest of those are advances that were strictly military, or in the case of the longbow a minor non-military but mostly military advance (they already had the short bow).
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:15.
Apolyton Time is 00:15. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
17-10-2001 05:15
|