Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;medoraman, post: 1990813, member: 26302&quot;]Interesting theory. Btw I agree it will always be a subject of debate. However, I think you put too much emphasis on Charlemagne. He was the product of Germanic tribes culture and traditions, he was a &quot;bright spot&quot; in the dark ages, (or &quot;early medieval&quot;), but after him it pretty much went right back to where it was before he came. I simply do not see a sea change in Europe after his rule than before it. I only see slow, gradual improvements brought about in improved farming practices enabling the formation, (reformation), of cities.</p><p><br /></p><p>Go back, though, to the late fifth century. This was where the old guard of Roman supremacy was being overrun by the germanic invasions. The entire way of life of western Europe was being changed. Instead of large Imperial armies being there to keep the peace, and large numbers of small farmers providing food for large, civilized cities, you have germanic armies overruning cities and making them deserted, small farmers being killed so food production declining, and vast new estates being carved out by non-romans. That, to me, is a sea change in Western Europe. Most European cities took centuries to recover, the entire power structure was destroyed, and the entire economy changed. I simply do not see that kind of change before and after Charlemagne. Now, if you wish to point to this as the turning point between dark ages, (early medieval), and medieval, I could buy that.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in