Automoderated users, Autopatrolled users, Bureaucrats, Comment administrators, Confirmed users, Forum administrators, Interface administrators, Moderators, Rollbackers, Administrators
117,086
edits
History Marches On: Difference between revisions
replace redirect
Looney Toons (talk | contribs) (replaced redirect) |
Looney Toons (talk | contribs) (replace redirect) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 78:
* Despite the modern associations with the word, [[This Index Is Not an Example|Gothic architecture wasn't at all that dark]]; churches used to be painted bright colours, and there was plenty of light. After centuries, the paint faded away and everything was covered in grime and dust and the colours were lost. Emulators in later centuries built buildings that looked like the old churches ended up looking, with all the gloomyness and intimidation that entails, that wasn't originally even there.
** Actually, yes, one of the properties of Gothic cathedral structure was big windows (between pillars). Big windows means a lot of light.
* The Dark Ages weren't nearly as [[Medieval Morons|backwards]] as [[The Renaissance|Renaissance]] and Enlightenment scholars claimed. Even the phrases "Dark Ages" and "Middle Ages" are going out of style: both were [[Genius: The Transgression|invented by the same scholars]] to emphasize [[Insufferable Genius|the glory of the ancient world and the nobility of the scholars who reached for it]], in [[Small Name, Big Ego|comparison]] to [[Humans Are Morons|the ignorant fools]] who [[All Of The Other Reindeer|laughed]] at [[Mad Scientist|their theories]], yes, laughed, but [[For Science!|they'll show them]], they'll [[Gone Horribly Right|show them all]]... Apologies, [[Non Sequitur Scene|sometimes]] we're a little [[Attention Deficit Ooh Shiny|absent-minded]]. Where were we? Ah, yes! Historians are now more likely to use the phrases "early medieval" and "late medieval" ("medieval" is derived from the Latin for "middle age", so you have to wonder [[Altum Videtur|if it just sounds cooler]], but then again there's not much else to name it after... [[Face Heel Turn|unless]] you [[hypocrite|ignore European historical influence]] entirely).
** Those Renaissance scholars and especially the enlightened scholars apparently put in a lot of work to 'prove' how little books had been written in the Middle Ages: by throwing away anything written in that time-period. Later researchers bought into the propaganda and genuinely believed nothing of note was written during Medieval times. They also introduced the idea of Medieval people being obsessed with religion when it seems they were mostly pretty laid-back about the whole thing. It was the Renaissance people who were the overly religious nutjobs (keep in mind they were the ones who cared enough to break off from the mother church).
* The supposed fall of Western culture was once thought in part to have been caused by a series of massive tribal migrations collectively known as the "Volkerwanderung". Specific examples included the migrations of the Saxons, Angles and Jutes to England; the Lombards into Italy; the Vandals and Visigoths into Spain; and the Franks into northern France. The belief was that these tribal migrations displaced the original inhabitants of these areas, sending them into less hospitable areas (such as the supposed "Celtic fringe" of the British Isles) and disrupting cultural progress. But DNA comparisons of ancient and modern peoples show very little evidence that the Volkerwanderung ever occurred; modern Englishmen, for instance, are far more closely related to ancient Britons (and to modern Scots, Irish, and Welshmen) than they are to modern Saxons. This DNA evidence is so new that historians are still grappling with the implications, but one possibility is that the Volkerwanderung only displaced the elite - about 0.5% of the population in most areas - leaving the bulk of the population unaffected except by the consequent cultural changes.
Line 106:
* Machiavelli, author of ''[[The Prince]]'', was a staunch supporter of the concept of a free republic. Unfortunately ''The Prince'' was his only well-known piece for a long time. Now it is known that he was most likely a satirist, because that was his only pro-Medici screed, and after writing it, he went right back to writing pro-republic stories.
** He was also often portrayed as a cynical, somber and shrewd politician. Contemporary data, including his letters and works portray him rather as a very sociable satirist who also happened to be an observant historian and a good rhetor.
* Contemporaries viewed Lucrezia Borgia as a scheming, amoral poisoner who abetted her father and brother (Rodrigo and Cesare Borgia, respectively) in their Machiavellian plans to dominate Europe. This belief became even more prevalent in Victorian times, when the word "borgia" entered the dictionary as a synonym for "sadistic female poisoner". [[Vindicated
** And then there's the Borgia's supposed poison, ''la cantarella'', a potent yet undetectable brew whose formula could be adjusted so that the victim could die at any time the poisoner wished. Too bad it's not actually possible for such a poison to exist given the limitations of Renaissance science and the unpredictable response every individual will have to a specific toxin. Roderigo probably used plain old arsenic while Cesare and Giovanni disposed with subtlety, strangling their enemies and throwing them in the Tiber.
** Did we mention that the Borgias were no more murderous than [[The Mafia|any other prominent Italian family of the time]]? They got the bad rep because they were [[Ambition is Evil|social climbers]], not because they were especially evil or because their evil was hereditary. Which is a good thing for [[Tom Cruise]], since [[Brooke Shields]] is a descendant of Lucrezia Borgia. Of course, that [[Shout-Out]] in ''[[The Prince]]'' certainly doesn't help...
| |||