Well there are a lot fewer sources of information between 200-1000 AD.
A lot of it is guesswork, a lot of misinformation, and culture became more localized than in centralized Rome, so someone in Spain was more apt to behave entirely different from someone in Britain.
I am trying to focus on overall trends, that's my point. While the evolution of arms/armor may have continued unabated, society itself seems to regress, in general, at least by most measures. I mean how do you measure the level of technological advancement?
Hygiene,
literacy,
military technology,
civilian/public construction,
trade (roads & boats),
food production,
centralized currency.
Certain aspects went backwards, certain trends continued forwards. Literacy is probably one of the largest measures for me, and that's why we know so much about Caesar, Hannibal, and so forth while certain other "heroes" such as Ragnar Lodrok remain shrouded in mystery. We know more about lesser figures in Antiquity than we do Charlemagne. People became more illierate in Western Europe.
A society could have been able to construct sophisticated plate armor but not concrete aqueducts. One could have built libraries, the other castles. What we considered more advanced is a matter of perspective, but we certainly have more in common with Antiquity than we do the Medieval citizens.
Think about how much knowledge from Antiquity was lost due to the destruction of libraries, Muslim/Christian censorship, or just because they weren't copied or saved. Caesar's life is one of the greatest historical stories, ever, and we're lucky to know of it. How many extraordinary stories are lost? How lucky we are to have the works of Livy and Pliny, etc.
People can't even agree on whether there was even a Ragnar Lodrok, and if he did he was one of the most important men of his time. The Dark Ages were Dark, if only, because we know so very little about them (or at least I don't).
A lot of it is guesswork, a lot of misinformation, and culture became more localized than in centralized Rome, so someone in Spain was more apt to behave entirely different from someone in Britain.
I am trying to focus on overall trends, that's my point. While the evolution of arms/armor may have continued unabated, society itself seems to regress, in general, at least by most measures. I mean how do you measure the level of technological advancement?
Hygiene,
literacy,
military technology,
civilian/public construction,
trade (roads & boats),
food production,
centralized currency.
Certain aspects went backwards, certain trends continued forwards. Literacy is probably one of the largest measures for me, and that's why we know so much about Caesar, Hannibal, and so forth while certain other "heroes" such as Ragnar Lodrok remain shrouded in mystery. We know more about lesser figures in Antiquity than we do Charlemagne. People became more illierate in Western Europe.
A society could have been able to construct sophisticated plate armor but not concrete aqueducts. One could have built libraries, the other castles. What we considered more advanced is a matter of perspective, but we certainly have more in common with Antiquity than we do the Medieval citizens.
Think about how much knowledge from Antiquity was lost due to the destruction of libraries, Muslim/Christian censorship, or just because they weren't copied or saved. Caesar's life is one of the greatest historical stories, ever, and we're lucky to know of it. How many extraordinary stories are lost? How lucky we are to have the works of Livy and Pliny, etc.
People can't even agree on whether there was even a Ragnar Lodrok, and if he did he was one of the most important men of his time. The Dark Ages were Dark, if only, because we know so very little about them (or at least I don't).
Christopher Vidrine, 30
